|
Tab8715 posted:What’s the expected rate of temperature increase assuming nothing happens? I’m seeing 4C at 2100 but I’m finding too much on carbon ppm and feedback effects. I just want to know the average timeline when that temperature is hit. between 2050 and 2100, it depends on things we can't accurately model yet, but with the feedback effects, expect closer to 2050. e: I'm not a climate scientist I just read a LOT of articles, and I'm giving you an average based on every article I've read so far.
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 08:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 18:28 |
|
|
So I've committed to the climate strike now. I feel a bit like a naive idiot because I went and checked with upper management to tell them what I wanted to do, and they basically said "Don't tell us any more. Sounds like you are probably going to be a bit sick that Friday. Hope you feel better soon." I just like to make sure everything's above board, even when it's a strike 
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 09:00
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I would imagine electric vehicles are still a net positive and should be encouraged. Not in the current state of things. Not only they require an upgrade of our power grid if we want to consider a majority of people owning them (like doubling your current power grid if everyone uses them) but there are no plan whatsoever to do anything with their batteries. PR talk (partly true) is that they are easily "recyclable", hear they can be used for something else easily because they do not last long and many applications do not need the power surge cars require, but in the fact no companies want to invest much in it (- a buddy working in a big company developed such a system and nobody wants to buy it so yeah it's happening as we speak already) because it's more expensive to store electricity using car batteries than just buying from the grid (energy is too cheap currently) also what after it's misleading to claim that car batteries are "recycled" because right now most car companies consider them as "disposable" (ie they don't care) and they are not recycled, just easily sold off and forgotten about. Eventually they'll be thrown away because there are no plan to really recycle them. So we will not only have no air to breathe but we'll be walking on a battery polluted ground (fun) in a few decades after they get "trendy" I strongly believe we should just ban all cars (except emergency vehicles and busses maybe) and go for trains and trams only, recycling the road grid to a railway grid. edit: and that's not counting the pollution by producing such cars and batteries edit2: Elukka posted:Which is a stupid idea because there are degrees (heh) to how hosed we are. 2 degrees is less bad than 3 which is less bad than 4. Not really, if we blow past 2 degree then there is no stopping 3, 4, 5 and we'll go up to 7 by 2300. So yeah either we go zero emission and revert back to pre 2011 co2 levels worldwide within a decade or we are done. Simple as that WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:timeline of temp increases, and what happens at certain temp increases. +2*c by 2035-2050, +5° by 2100 (with 2m sea rise), +7°C and +60m sea level rise by 2300, no more than a billion people above to survive in such a world (assuming we do survive the heat waves if they are coupled with humidity and there are no further collapse we didn't think about) no going down of temperature for 3000-4000 years (yeah you read that right) and if you wanna know WHEN it'll officially be too late: 6 years (in 2025) though it arguably already is as we haven't planned to do anything in the meanwhile and even if went zero CO2 emission today all over the world we'd still reach +1.5°C (but avoid the loopback chain) And that's 2018 data so it's probably worse by now Nice piece of fish posted:In Europe it kind of is already, green parties are growing at an incredible rate and are enjoying a lot of support, they are the biggest single-issue parties in general. Such a shame that a lot of them consider themselves to be politically centrist, and many are happy with Macron-style economic incentives for capitalists which at this point, yeah is much too little too late there are climate strike every friday here, the biggest one made the news, the next day government was the only one not to sign a treaty for the climate. SA_Avenger fucked around with this message at 13:40 on Sep 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 09:29
|
|
|
mdemone posted:No, we are expecting people to overcome their fear. Fear is the mind-killer. In the United States if you went on strike your employer may terminate your employment. You might be able to sue but you’d have to get a lawyer which costs time and money for someone that doesn’t have income. Once that’s settled your reputation will be hurt. Future employers will be hesitant from employing you and won’t even look at your resume. Your coworkers will dislike all the work you dropped on them and you might lose friends. If they’re evil your employer might retaliate against your friends to show who’s in charge. There’s more than one way to make difference than striking but if your strike just gets you immediately terminated, broke, entirely ostracized and essentially makes no difference than you need to do something else. That said, there’s always risk with any political activism but you want to potentially return out of taking that risk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 14:41
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:In the United States if you went on strike your employer may terminate your employment. You might be able to sue but you’d have to get a lawyer which costs time and money for someone that doesn’t have income. You're hitting at a prisoner's dilemma/game theory sort of situation. The worst thing about striking is that you need to have faith in your fellow workers to support you in your strike. Without unions, the value proposition is pretty difficult. So the real question isn't "How do I strike given these challenges?" it should be "How do I live with myself if I don't and it has some kind of effect, or could have had an effect if I did?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
Part of why I ended up getting fired from my computer touching job and ended up working at a bicycle touching job was because I kinda had a mental break because I realized I was going to loving die being miserable sitting in a cubicle for half of my waking hours while working for a never ending stream of companies and government bodies that were part of the problem. Now I make a living trying my best to help people get off their asses and out of their cars and ride bikes every day and do my best to shirk the consumerist lifestyle. My life is a climate strike.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 15:19
|
|
|
tuyop posted:You're hitting at a prisoner's dilemma/game theory sort of situation. The worst thing about striking is that you need to have faith in your fellow workers to support you in your strike. Without unions, the value proposition is pretty difficult. I don’t see how that relates? There’s more than one way to make a difference than striking. It’s not about employee support but will this strike have an impact? You could still not have support from coworkers and make a difference - it depends.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:There’s more than one way to make difference than striking but if your strike just gets you immediately terminated, broke, entirely ostracized and essentially makes no difference than you need to do something else. The idea of a general strike is becoming more popular in a lot of activist circles for a lot of different causes because our system has largely minimized the impact of other types of political activism. Large-scale economic disruption is effectively one of the only non-violent forms of effective political action that's left.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:The idea of a general strike is becoming more popular in a lot of activist circles for a lot of different causes because our system has largely minimized the impact of other types of political activism. Large-scale economic disruption is effectively one of the only non-violent forms of effective political action that's left. Yes, I don’t disagree with that but strike simply doesn’t apply as an effective tactic in every circumstance. Striking wouldn’t be an option (yet) in certain APAC Countries or in the Middle East but it working incredibly well in Europe. Thinking about this further - a public school teacher in Oklahoma should probably not go on strike but maybe try to carefully interject global warming into the class. While one in Seattle should go on strike and lead their students. Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 15:40 on Sep 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:The idea of a general strike is becoming more popular in a lot of activist circles for a lot of different causes because our system has largely minimized the impact of other types of political activism. Large-scale economic disruption is effectively one of the only non-violent forms of effective political action that's left. Economic disruption is violence, citizen.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
SA_Avenger posted:I strongly believe we should just ban all cars (except emergency vehicles and busses maybe) and go for trains and trams only, recycling the road grid to a railway grid. I agree but that’s the official course of governments from the entirety of European Countries to China. Even the state of California is trying to decide when to ban ICE Vehicle sales. Which really sucks but there’s no political will otherwise expect Oslo or another European City I can’t recall that banned cars (taxis and delivery trucks excluded) in the city center. SA_Avenger posted:Not really, if we blow past 2 degree then there is no stopping 3, 4, 5 and we'll go up to 7 by 2300. There’s a chance once we pass a certain point we’ll have cascading feedback effects but all of that research is a work-in-progress. No one ever looked into it because scientists never thought we’d pass 2C! The earlier estimate were a billion people located near the poles >4C near 2100. 7C or greater didn’t include any population estimates. I mean all this looks incredibly bleak yet we cannot simply give up. Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Sep 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 18:17
|
|
|
SA_Avenger posted:The green parties propose nothing usefull for our current crisis though and don't gather more than 10% of the votes in Europe. Heck even greenpeace doesn't propose anything useful right now, noone is going to put up "BAN CARS, FISHING, BIG SHIPS, PLANES in 2020" on their website Green Parties cater to tenured teachers and their like of the solid middle class. Nothing that would really inconvenience that demographic and their holidays in Tuscany would make it farther than their most raucous youth organization.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
I think giving up means different things to different people. Instead of infinite energy spent on whether its real or not, humanity will pour endless hours into whether we should bother trying or not. We are not going to get our collective act together. The most we'll see is a lovely top-down authoriatianism that uses 'oh we declared a climate emergency back in 2019' as cause for solidifying the hierarchy. btw check out #climatebrawl its a hastag that both climate scientists and deniers use to debate. its weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:31
|
|
|
sauer kraut posted:Green Parties cater to tenured teachers and their like of the solid middle class. Green parties are a legacy of 70s environmentalism and tend to be filled today with the same people who populated them in the 70s as 20-somethings, which is why they're usually most interested in putting solar panels on middle-class homes and saving the whales, instead of the actual root-and-branch transformation of our economic system that's necessary to prevent biosphere collapse. If you want an electric car rebate, vote for greens. If you want any chance of saving the world, vote for socialists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 22:39
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:I think giving up means different things to different people. Instead of infinite energy spent on whether its real or not, humanity will pour endless hours into whether we should bother trying or not. We are not going to get our collective act together. The most we'll see is a lovely top-down authoriatianism that uses 'oh we declared a climate emergency back in 2019' as cause for solidifying the hierarchy. Okay fine, but what does that mean? They way I see it, humanity will still exist even at >2C or even higher. Millions of people will still be on this planet. Do not stop fighting. Lives depend on it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
I know that sounds true but it's really not. If there are millions of people left then the apocalypse has happened. There also comes a point where it's completely out of our hands. At what point do we trigger massive natural methane releases? We're at 420ppm with a temperature lag and all that permafrost is already melting.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 23:51
|
|
|
Funky See Funky Do posted:I know that sounds true but it's really not. If there are millions of people left then the apocalypse has happened. There also comes a point where it's completely out of our hands. At what point do we trigger massive natural methane releases? We're at 420ppm with a temperature lag and all that permafrost is already melting. I'm a scientist (not climate, but systems-oriented at least), and I'm completely convinced that if the human race vanished tomorrow along with every anthropogenic CO2 emission source, the planet would still hit 2C and probably the feedbacks would continue to trigger anyway. I don't like to come in here with nihilism because there's enough of it going around, but...
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
Well, I mean, yeah. The planet has been at 400ppm before and every time it was it was 3-5C hotter. As far as I'm concerned 3C is the best case scenario. The only question is how quickly the earth warms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
Yes, all of that is true but the kind of stuff we’re getting back from the deep adaption folks (not all but some of the louder ones) is that all hope is lost. We should stop trying and just make the best of out of what’s left. And then they throw rocks at those trying to do the impossible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 01:01
|
|
|
mdemone posted:I'm a scientist (not climate, but systems-oriented at least), and I'm completely convinced that if the human race vanished tomorrow along with every anthropogenic CO2 emission source, the planet would still hit 2C and probably the feedbacks would continue to trigger anyway. Probably, but this planet also has the PETM in the list of poo poo it's gone through. The most novel stressor we're adding is carbonic acid in the surface ocean. If you want to look at something that triggers a PT-style extinction or larger, I'd look there instead of something like surface temperature anomalies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
mdemone posted:I'm a scientist (not climate, but systems-oriented at least), and I'm completely convinced that if the human race vanished tomorrow along with every anthropogenic CO2 emission source, the planet would still hit 2C and probably the feedbacks would continue to trigger anyway. If I recall the last IPCC report had a section that said exactly that, if humanity entirely stopped emitting immediately there still wouldn't be any permafrost by 2050, and that assessment was before we found out that it just collapses into a heap of dirt with no insulation properties for the underlying layers of permafrost when it melts!
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 02:45
|
|
|
Shima Honnou posted:If I recall the last IPCC report had a section that said exactly that, if humanity entirely stopped emitting immediately there still wouldn't be any permafrost by 2050, and that assessment was before we found out that it just collapses into a heap of dirt with no insulation properties for the underlying layers of permafrost when it melts! curious, is the clathrate gun thing real?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 02:56
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:curious, is the clathrate gun thing real? Inconclusive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
Are there any theoretical ways to stop the permafrost from melting or melt it in a way that isn’t super destructive?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:curious, is the clathrate gun thing real? The researchers (Shakhova and Semiletov) doing some of the heaviest work on Arctic floor gas hydrates believe that there is "exponential uncertainty" on possible sea floor methane releases.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:14
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Are there any theoretical ways to stop the permafrost from melting or melt it in a way that isn’t super destructive? Well, even the official, if generally far too conservative, consensus from the UN was "it's going to all melt except maybe a couple pockets that are protected by being under the water even if humanity died right now" so, probably not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:14
|
|
|
Shima Honnou posted:If I recall the last IPCC report had a section that said exactly that, if humanity entirely stopped emitting immediately there still wouldn't be any permafrost by 2050, and that assessment was before we found out that it just collapses into a heap of dirt with no insulation properties for the underlying layers of permafrost when it melts! You do not recall correctly, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:14
|
|
|
This report was issued by the UN in May of this year and goes into it somewhat
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:21
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 03:25
|
|
|
Also I'm just gonna remind everyone that our modeling so far has been... ... ...optimistic? No better way to say it, because numerical simulations of multiphase fluid dynamics are lol forget it, and we think we can model a loving planet?? I mean, of course the people who do this research don't think so. The problem is that everyone else thinks we have more than a zeroth-order handle on what is happening. Which is why lots of us are already hitting the eject button.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 04:11
|
|
|
We really don't know a lot; like polar bear populations in some places are doing fine even with sea ice loss because biomass is blooming. It's not that things are good, but rather there are going to be very, very, very many unexpected effects. Some will be positive. E: ...also there are already huge social changes happening. Just 4 years ago the presidential debates had essentially 0 climate change discussion, and this time around it's got it's own town hall. Minds are, in fact, changing. Unormal fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Sep 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 04:21
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:I loved this piece. This in particular I posted this in this thread before but here's some more Merwin for you in case you didn't see it: After the Dragonflies Dragonflies were as common as sunlight hovering in their own days backward forward and sideways as though they were memory now there are grown-ups hurrying who never saw one and do not know what they are not seeing the veins in a dragonfly’s wings were made of light the veins in the leaves knew them and the flowing rivers the dragonflies came out of the color of water knowing their own way when we appeared in their eyes we were strangers they took their light with them when they went there will be no one to remember us
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 07:10
|
|
|
Unormal posted:We really don't know a lot; like polar bear populations in some places are doing fine even with sea ice loss because biomass is blooming. It's not that things are good, but rather there are going to be very, very, very many unexpected effects. Some will be positive. Politically speaking, things are looking better in the United States but 2020 will be a defining year.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 08:43
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Green parties are a legacy of 70s environmentalism and tend to be filled today with the same people who populated them in the 70s as 20-somethings, which is why they're usually most interested in putting solar panels on middle-class homes and saving the whales, instead of the actual root-and-branch transformation of our economic system that's necessary to prevent biosphere collapse. If you want an electric car rebate, vote for greens. If you want any chance of saving the world, vote for socialists. What countries have socialist parties with more ambitious climate protection goals than the green parties?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 11:41
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Politically speaking, things are looking better in the United States but 2020 will be a defining year. Trump will win again, so I doubt it tbh
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 15:52
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Although I am ultimately very pessimistic, I do think it's worth considering tipping points: the physical systems of the Earth have them, but civilization does as well; it feels as though nothing will ever change, but there will be a moment when the reality of the situation comes crashing home. It's inevitable, and I think it will happen soon, but the question is whether it will be soon enough. I have a degree in political science and I want to echo this thought. Human culture is very malleable, and people tend not to be able to see that. How many generations ago did suburban car culture happen? One? People can change, although they tend to furiously deny that fact. Also 2020 is probably the most important election cycle of our lifetimes. If Republicans get to redraw district lines for another decade American democracy will continue to be unable to respond to any public sentiment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 16:29
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I have a degree in political science and I want to echo this thought. Human culture is very malleable, and people tend not to be able to see that. How many generations ago did suburban car culture happen? One? People can change, although they tend to furiously deny that fact. I majored in Political Science and still read a ton. Trump’s potential re-election scares the absolutely poo poo out of me and the slow overall increase of his support from Republicans is shocking. That only means more division and democracy simply doesn’t function if the people don’t have enough in common. On the flip side, his overall approval rating is completely pathetic given economic conditions. He will need to run, put massive effort behind his campaign but I don’t think repeating socialist over and over again will work today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
Venomous posted:Trump will win again, so I doubt it tbh He will have to run. If he does win again that’s probably the last straw for humanity but his victory is far from guaranteed. On the other hand I don’t have much hope for centrist/moderate democrats like Biden. Sure, natural gas is way better than other alternatives like coal but we are far too late in the game for that. On a final note, if Trump wins I’m hosting the best end the world parties. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I majored in Political Science and still read a ton. Trump’s potential re-election scares the absolutely poo poo out of me and the slow overall increase of his support from Republicans is shocking. That only means more division and democracy simply doesn’t function if the people don’t have enough in common. How quaint of you to call America's two-party, first-past-the-post, gerry-mandered, electoral college system a "democracy".
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 18:28 |
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:How quaint of you to call America's two-party, first-past-the-post, gerry-mandered, electoral college system a "democracy". It’s still a democracy even if it’s a lovely one. Republicans aren’t spending millions of dollars on prime time tv ads for the fun of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2019 17:48
|
|