|
barkbell posted:That’s what I said. Developed nations could slingshot developing countries into modernization past the industrial revolution or whatever and they always respond “I don’t want to pay for it.” Which I think is the real reason for climate deniers. There's profit in burning coal. Coal is cheap as gently caress if you ignore the environmental damage. A poor country that can only afford coal is going to look at that and go "coal it is!"
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:27 |
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:There's profit in burning coal. Coal is cheap as gently caress if you ignore the environmental damage. A poor country that can only afford coal is going to look at that and go "coal it is!" That's of course assuming the country has either local natural coal deposits or there is an international market for coal. And its also ignoring how some renewables are as cheap or cheaper compared to coal, even in the "developing world". 
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2018 20:27
|
|
|
Reminder that building up infrastructure is itself energy intensive, even if you limit electricity generation to renewables and nuclear.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2018 20:29
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Reminder that building up infrastructure is itself energy intensive, even if you limit electricity generation to renewables and nuclear. Certainly, but the issue with the climate isn't that we're expending energy but that we're emitting greenhouse gasses while also limiting natural sequestration cycles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
By that I meant that you use fossil fuels to transport materials, to operate construction machinery, and to produce cement and plastics. Setting up infrastructure also displaces the natural environment but that goes without saying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
One advantage to being 'undeveloped' is that these countries don't have centuries of antiquated bullshit piled up already. Iv'e specifically seen this lauded wrt renewables and wireless. Countries in Africa which are rolling out new infrastructure don't have to contend with trillions of dollars worth of stuff getting in the way or major institutional interests screeching about coal or whatever. So why the emphasis on, "they deserve the right to industrialize, too?" No, they deserve to develop without making our mistakes. And we should help them. They can do better than we did.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
We definitely should help them. The issue is getting past "but that costs money."
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
Ah, i've been told the forum i said i'd send via pm has already been posted in this forum heaps so: https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/ sorry about that guys!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 00:58
|
|
|
That Great Filter poo poo is awesome. I bet there are tons of super interesting alien great filters that we'll never know about because we're hosed. I'm saddest that I'll never get to know anything of alien societies and cultures. Really loving annoying. Still, you figure that across infinity there must be one society that successfully expands and consumes all. Or maybe if you get to a certain point you just meditate all day or put your mind into a computer and cum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:The great filter is almost certainly the jump to multicellular life plus fanfiction that it's future stuff because that gets to be more dramatic and sadbrains. Charlz Guybon posted:This is not true. Multicellular life has evolved separately several times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 06:03
|
|
|
Whenever someone mentions a US military branch to combat climate change, I imagine strongarming foreign countries to pledge to destroy or never develop certain technologies, the same way as a lot of countries are strongarmed into not developing the capacity to build nuclear power right now. You know, with this zero-sum mentality where everyone else has to stop burning coal so that the US can burn more. Also, underdeveloped countries aren't going to have industrial revolutions, history doesn't work like that. Last time I checked, they were mostly developing directly into service economies rather than going through an industrial production dominated phase at all. New players can only easily get on supply-constrained markets, and when companies need to heavily invest in marketing, it's a sign that their time is long over. There's only a pretty limited amount of profitable industry to build when others are already shipping products around the world using fine-tuned production processes with decades of experience behind them. For development of national industry to happen beyond that point, the country has to be very protectionist or restricted from importing goods. On the other hand most services can't be just shipped: if foreigners want to sell them to you, they have to produce them near you and hire local people. The sensible choice would be to ensure that sustainable energy choices would be cheaper for them to use than fossil fuel energy, and to an extent it's already happening, seeing as e.g. solar is getting cheaper fast some countries can use it really efficiently. But nuclear is pretty much blocked for many due to both the up-front cost of building it and how few companies in the world are capable of building it. And getting rid of oil will require massive infrastructure investment from any country, seeing as goods and people need to move.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 06:32
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Not megacities. Megacities as they exist now are terrible because it's unmanaged urban sprawl turned upwards. All you actually need, in terms of physical space to comfortably house the entire human population, is a bunch of Parises. Paris is incredibly space and resource efficient for its population, and it's got nothing to do with skyscrapers or whatever. It's just that most of the city's housing is 6-story buildings and there's very few individual separated homes. That's it. There's still plenty of luxury and budget accommodations everywhere and literally over half the city's land is public parkland. Edit: 3,300 Parises would be enough for the entire planet's current population. Edit edit: That's 136,000 square miles, or about the size of Utah and Colorado put together. And that's including more than half of that area being open parkland. Roadie fucked around with this message at 08:47 on Oct 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 08:23
|
|
|
uncop posted:Whenever someone mentions a US military branch to combat climate change, I imagine strongarming foreign countries to pledge to destroy or never develop certain technologies, the same way as a lot of countries are strongarmed into not developing the capacity to build nuclear power right now. You know, with this zero-sum mentality where everyone else has to stop burning coal so that the US can burn more. Ya. This is how I feel but I'm too stupid in the moment to put it into words. I'm always falling into the trap of dummies using terms like industrial revolution and I just let them out of convenience but really I should correct them because of the important connotations it implies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 12:26
|
|
|
How much does it make sense to even build up infrastructure in places that are gonna be unlivable in a few generations anyway? Let's be forward thinking and start building modern nuclear plants and apartment buildings all over Siberia so they're ready for all the mass migrations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
very little is going to become unlivable, like yes the population distribution will shift north, and inshallah florida will be taken by the sea, but most of forced migrations will be about moving inland from flooding not north from temperatures
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 17:20
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:very little is going to become unlivable, like yes the population distribution will shift north, and inshallah florida will be taken by the sea, but most of forced migrations will be about moving inland from flooding not north from temperatures Dude, that's extremely wrong. e: like, just google "climate change uninhabitable" you fuckin moron. huge swaths of the planet are going to be uninhabitable for significant chunks of the year by the end of the century. Forced migration due to sea level rise will pale in comparison. How are u fucked around with this message at 19:32 on Oct 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
Roadie posted:All you actually need, in terms of physical space to comfortably house the entire human population, is a bunch of Parises. It would be interesting to apply that analysis to the USA and determine the impact on CO2/capita etc. Would also give us some magnificent national parks :-)
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 18:45
|
|
|
How are u posted:Dude, that's extremely wrong. huge swaths of the planet are already uninhabitable for significant chunks of the year. yes they're going to grow, but thats not where people live. most people dont live in the sahel or on the arabian peninsula, or at the outskirts of the gobi. most of human kind lives near a coast and/or in a floodplain in a temperate band that will get warmer, but not really drive anyone to move (this century). think of it like this, by 2100 NYC will have DCs weather. or hell, Atlanta's. that will suck, but its not a migration-inducing thing. however in that same time frame everything with a thousand feet of the shoreline will have been damaged by storm surges and everything below the 500 year floodplain line will have been destroyed from river deltas that can no longer empty stormwater as fast. edit: keep in mind what i'm responding too, the comment was about building poo poo in siberia. my point is thats nonsense, pennsylvania will be perfectly fine. StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Oct 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
Minus the staggering amounts of lead contamination, of course.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 20:55
|
|
|
Billionaires know what is up with climate change and the near future of human civilization on the planet. Those that are not actively trying to leave the planet due to some God complex of being the first human to own the entirety of Mars are buying up private land en-mass in NZ, Chile, or Argentina and such. A great article on the latter: https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2018-rich-new-zealand-doomsday-preppers/
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
imho thats a lot less about billionaires having any loving clue more than most people and more about that when you have a billion dollars spending 10 - 50 million of it on a stupid zombie scenario is a fun hobby
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:imho thats a lot less about billionaires having any loving clue more than most people and more about that when you have a billion dollars spending 10 - 50 million of it on a stupid zombie scenario is a fun hobby They never plan to have a production apparatus or any means of outlasting their supplies or expanding, so, yeah, this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
Areas of the planet that are currently habitable will certainly become uninhabitable. The tropics are hosed. As for temperate zones, hope y'all don't like autumn and winter, cuz those are disapperaring. It's going to be summer year round, temperature wise. 80 degrees in December and January, in New England. And actual summer will be in upper 90s and lower 100s. Its going to suck so bad,but still getting off light compared to tropics.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 00:37
|
|
|
Blue Star posted:Areas of the planet that are currently habitable will certainly become uninhabitable. The tropics are hosed. The summer temperatures are gonna raise like 5 or 10 degrees and the winter is going to rise 50-90 degrees? That seems kind of lopsided.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 01:12
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:The summer temperatures are gonna raise like 5 or 10 degrees and the winter is going to rise 50-90 degrees? That seems kind of lopsided. Polar temps raising faster than equatorial temps. Arctic air that brings winter temps in northern hemisphere will be way way warmer.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
Telephones posted:That Great Filter poo poo is awesome. I bet there are tons of super interesting alien great filters that we'll never know about because we're hosed. I'm saddest that I'll never get to know anything of alien societies and cultures. Really loving annoying. Still, you figure that across infinity there must be one society that successfully expands and consumes all. Or maybe if you get to a certain point you just meditate all day or put your mind into a computer and cum. The greatest filter is consciousness and survival instincts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 02:02
|
|
|
There are certainly some regions that will get thoroughly hosed by end-of-century just from the net temperature/humidity increase, ie Persian Gulf and northern India, since they're both densely populated and already suffer from sporadic close brushes with 35C wet-bulb temperature. But the real fun will be when the thermohaline circulation shuts down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 02:25
|
|
|
Cop a load of this for a prediction: The Arctic sea will become ice free for the first time (in our history) by summer 2022. After that it will become ice free year-round within ten years. Once it is ice free year-round the cold centre of the northern hemisphere will shift to Greenland, which will cause the jet stream to destabilise and reorient around Greenland, massively disrupting northern hemisphere weather patterns leading to mass, ongoing crop failures and a host of other effects not conducive with a stable world as we know it. link : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMra7pPFqmE Discuss. Who wants to be in my gang of motorbike cannibals
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
This guy's non peer reviewed, possibly non-existent models don't exactly have a great track record: http://www.archive.sierraclub.ca/en/AdultDiscussionPlease By Paul Beckwith On March 23, 2013, I made the following prediction: “For the record—I do not think that any sea ice will survive this summer. An event unprecedented in human history is today, this very moment, transpiring in the Arctic Ocean.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 05:12
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:This guy's non peer reviewed, possibly non-existent models don't exactly have a great track record: I'm halfway through picking out animal skulls for shoulder pads here, don't tell me I'm wasting my time
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 08:39
|
|
|
Plumps posted:I'm halfway through picking out animal skulls for shoulder pads here, don't tell me I'm wasting my time Pff, look at this chump. Everyone knows tires are the superior material for shoulder pads. ps. wanna join your gang.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2018 08:46
|
|
|
Ssthalar posted:Pff, look at this chump. Everyone knows tires are the superior material for shoulder pads. I like your attitude, Tires. Tell you what - you bring your own tooth file and skull polisher and you're in. Ability to render human fat into motorbike fuel will be looked upon favourably.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 01:40
|
|
|
Climate Change: lol my b
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 17:16
|
|
|
Apparently there will be a new IPCC report tomorrow? We shall wait for it with bated breath.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 18:53
|
|
|
"see that in the rear view mirror? that was 1.5" -ipcc
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
Gortarius posted:Apparently there will be a new IPCC report tomorrow? Prediction: it will say 1.5C to 2.7C in the next 82 years which is very bad and the most dire prediction they have ever produced and then this thread will broadly ignore it because it's not a spicey enough number to support personal revenge or survivalist fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
ipcc report is just a link to the clip from breaking bad where the guy kills himself with a defibrillator in a bathroom
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 22:10
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Prediction: it will say 1.5C to 2.7C in the next 82 years which is very bad and the most dire prediction they have ever produced and then this thread will broadly ignore it because it's not a spicey enough number to support personal revenge or survivalist fantasy. Double prediction: 5 years from now they add another .5 to 1 degree to both of those numbers and the denialists will keep pretending like everything's okay because it's still not as bad as it technically could be, and certainly won't become an even worse prediction 5 years after that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:Double prediction: 5 years from now they add another .5 to 1 degree to both of those numbers and the denialists will keep pretending like everything's okay because it's still not as bad as it technically could be, and certainly won't become an even worse prediction 5 years after that. It's you, you are the denialist. Doing some lame "the IPCC is a bunch of hacks that don't know what they are saying" isn't helping climate change, it's a lame and lovely tactic to muddy the waters and pretend this is some matter of opinion thing that no one is researching or looking into and it just can be whatever you feel like you'd like it to be. IPCC models have been very accurate so far, they refine them over time but the idea on either side that they are just a bunch of dummies that constantly have egg on their face as they wildly have to change their know nothing fake news models is not a real thing. This is observed vs projected temperatures, they have been continuously been very good science done by real climate researchers: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:27 |
|
|
I'm not criticizing the IPCC, I'm making fun of the people who take every opportunity they can to pretend like everything is okay, including completely ignoring the fact that every scientific report on every subject relating to climate change looks worse and worse every few years, but these people refuse to see the pattern and insist that everything is going to be okay.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2018 22:48
|
|