Cuttlefush posted:

wrong i posted an article from a guy with a bad* website format. likewise plenty of non-crazy looking cranks have non-crazy looking websites

*it's actually good. also jay hanson's websites all died in like the mid-2000s and those are repros. the originals back around peak oil 2005 and before were art https://web.archive.org/web/20040618005404/http://www.dieoff.org/

Zodium posted:

Microplastics posted:

tf is this



help help i'm trapped in a web and can't perceive my way out

Microplastics posted:

tf is this



help help i'm trapped in a web and can't perceive my way out

Cuttlefush posted:

https://cespa.uconn.edu/ if you're at all curious
https://cespa.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2363/2018/04/CESPA_brochure.pdf for the grad student pitch

note: i've never been to connecticutt. this is not an endorsement. these don't seem like the mk ultra psychologists but you still should not trust them

Ruggan posted:

this sounds exactly what a crank would say

Osv18 posted:

fair enough. I am 100% a crank.

Hubbert posted:

Correct. The world beyond 2050 is unimaginable to the modern perspective.

For the short version, see the following article: Life Circa 2050 Will Be Bad. Really Bad.

For the long version, here's the entirety of Chapter 7: Climate Change in the Twenty-First Century as lifted directly from To Govern The Globe: World Orders & Catastrophic Change (Alfred W. McCoy).

Hubbert posted:

Correct. The world beyond 2050 is unimaginable to the modern perspective.

For the short version, see the following article: Life Circa 2050 Will Be Bad. Really Bad.

For the long version, here's the entirety of Chapter 7: Climate Change in the Twenty-First Century as lifted directly from To Govern The Globe: World Orders & Catastrophic Change (Alfred W. McCoy).

Brendan Rodgers posted:

I like to think I'm more of a lever, or maybe a gear.

DarkLich posted:

the signal I see is that the current energy barons want to maintain dominance, and have something to gain by hydrogen fuel gaining traction. let me know if that's the wrong read tho

I understand that there will be hurdles to any true green energy, like the one you described. even if we've had advances in solar or wind or whatever, none of those advancements have led to the dismantling of existing dirty energy.

I'm still interested in the science or infrastructure that would be behind it; even if its doomed to perish against the political and capitalist machine

Fozzy The Bear posted:

I enjoyed reading this, thank you

Cup Runneth Over posted:

What really makes it this thread is that that never happened but people pretend it did because it's funnier

Irony.or.Death posted:

don't worry bro we've got your back

MightyBigMinus posted:

the thing about the back half of these predictions/models (say beyond 2060) is that the absolute horror of the 40s and 50s will drive massive behavior/resource-usage change.

you can paint your hopes or fears into that, but at its core its a logistics constraint. crops will die. people will fight. BAU will not be going on in the 70s/80s/90s one way or the other. so its kinda pointless to talk about 3C or 5C at 2100. it gives the current situation too much credit for sustainability.

like, you don't have to believe the specific particulars of ministry for the future, but knowing what we know about how bad the 40s and 50s are going to be, I don't see how global oil tanker shipping, refineries, pipelines and lng ports survive. the needful will be done. even if far too late and just for vengance.

TehSaurus posted:

you stay away from my posterior!!

starkebn posted:

Harik posted:

only thing i see on that graph is a whole lotta people getting laid starting in 20 years. just look at all that fuckin happening

so much sex

quote:

Firm releases almost 800kg of ‘forever chemical’ a year into Lancashire river
Exclusive: Environment Agency finds ‘very persistent, mobile and toxic’ PFAS in effluent legally discharged near Wyre estuary

A chemicals company is releasing large quantities of a “forever chemical” described as being “very persistent, mobile and toxic” into the River Wyre in Lancashire each year, and is not breaking any rules.

Earlier this year, the Guardian and Watershed Investigations revealed that effluent coming from the site of AGC Chemicals Europe in Thornton-Cleveleys could contain about 700 types of perfluorinated and polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS).

PFAS is an umbrella term for thousands of human-made substances known as “forever chemicals” because they will not break down in the environment for thousands of years. Some are also known to be toxic and can accumulate in the human body.

The Environment Agency has now released its evaluation of a PFAS known as EEA-NH4 that was found in the effluent, and said it was “very persistent” and “mobile” in the environment, as well as “toxic” because it was classified as “reprotoxic category 2”, meaning there was evidence to suggest it could disrupt sexual function, fertility and development in humans.

Using data supplied by AGC Chemicals Europe, including monitoring data and effluent volumes released into the River Wyre, the agency estimated that an average of about 783kg of EEA-NH4 is discharged into the river each year.

The report highlights multiple gaps in knowledge, including whether, as with many PFAS, the substance builds up in humans and animals. “It is not possible to draw a conclusion on the bioaccumulation potential of EEA-NH4 in air-breathing organisms in the absence of data on the human clearance time or better predictive methods,” it states.

Prof Ian Cousins, an environmental chemist at Stockholm University, said: “EEA-NH4 is very persistent and mobile similar to GenX used by Chemours, which has been found in the Arctic, and it’s likely that EEA-NH4 will also be measured there as emissions continue. It will be transported by ocean currents, but even air emissions can result in long-range atmospheric transport.”

Dr David Megson, a senior lecturer in chemistry and environmental forensics at Manchester Metropolitan University, said the case highlighted “how we desperately need improved regulation and management of PFAS.

“Industry continues to innovate and develop new PFAS to replace those that have been banned. However, tougher regulations need to be put in place to ensure that these replacement chemicals are not also going to pose a risk to the environment and human health.

“This should not be at the detriment to industry, but we should use it as an opportunity for collaboration to develop safer sustainable replacements for PFAS.”

EEA-NH4 is just one of more than 10,000 chemicals classed as PFAS and currently there are only restrictions on the manufacture and use of two – perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) – because they have been studied closely and linked with a range of diseases including cancers and thyroid problems.

AGC Chemicals Europe, which produces polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE), said it “has never used PFOS, and PFOA was voluntarily phased out over a decade ago”.

In 2022, Watershed Investigations found discharges of 12,000 nanograms a litre of PFOA to the Wyre estuary coming from the site where AGC Chemicals is based. AGC said it did not use or manufacture PFOA, and that any PFOA in the effluent may have come from historical usage at the site. AGC’s discharge is not illegal.

Studies have also shown that some PFAS can disrupt normal reproductive function in women through altering hormone secretion, the menstrual cycle, and fertility, but any effects of the emissions of thousands of other PFAS remain a mystery.

Cousins said: “We know little about the consequences of the releases of the hundreds of other PFAS because we only understand the toxicities, and other properties, of a few PFAS.”

...
The spokesperson added that AGC Chemicals Europe “continues to work closely with the Environment Agency to ensure regular assessment of the substances we use”.
...

Cuttlefush posted:

https://cespa.uconn.edu/ if you're at all curious
https://cespa.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2363/2018/04/CESPA_brochure.pdf for the grad student pitch

note: i've never been to connecticutt. this is not an endorsement. these don't seem like the mk ultra psychologists but you still should not trust them

Jizzny Princess posted:

Happy 425.01 ppm Day

WaryWarren posted:

I baked and consumed a tray of pot brownies on the day we reached 420.69

4d3d3d posted:

I'm sorry for posting that, as knowing about it is probably going to upset a few people. Let's have a multipage discussion about the value of knowing and posting distressing things

HazCat posted:

See I'm looking at the same graph as you but what I'm seeing is fascists in Western countries making contraceptives, birth control and family planning illegal while also destroying public education (which will also destroy female education almost entirely if all the private schools are religiously affiliated).

Not that much more loving, but a whole lot more misery.

Zodium posted:

lmfao

HazCat posted:

See I'm looking at the same graph as you but what I'm seeing is fascists in Western countries making contraceptives, birth control and family planning illegal while also destroying public education (which will also destroy female education almost entirely if all the private schools are religiously affiliated).

Not that much more loving, but a whole lot more misery.

croup coughfield posted:

im glad someone asked! the capitalist form of military-industrialism, narrowly focused as it is on short-term profits, has already caused millions of deaths and have created conditions that will kill millions or perhaps billions more. as individuals, its patently impossible for us to mitigate these effects for ourselves and our loved ones, much less the earth as a whole. a great deal of the damage is permanent, and any mitigation of its effects on the biosphere and planetary systems generally will require tremendous amounts of effort coordinated by a coalition of powers willing to directly confront and dismantle bourgeois forces and cooperate toward long-term goals. i think the thread and i are generally in agreement on this.

where i think we part ways - and why i refer to this and similar threads as doomerist - is that i hold that this is not only possible, but happening. american hegemony, the festering heart of bourgeois rule, is on the wane. a new world order is being decided right now. assuming the transition of power avoids nuclear annihilation, the aforementioned coalition that already exists will have more freedom to act. the faster america and its own gang of blood drinkers and wealthy sycophants are destabilized and disempowered, the better the overall picture of the far future looks.

if you live in the west and you believe yourself to be invested in the conflict regarding climate destruction, you have an obligation to involve yourself in that struggle as a part of an organized front. it is not helpful or moral to spend every day reading and internalizing the day's new minutiae of horror. thats protestant self-flagellation, the cult of raising awareness. this frustrates me a great deal as a political organizer. what i want from this thread is the same as i want from every thread in cspam: go outside. get organized, get involved. devote yourself toward undermining bourgeois rule and creating self-propagating institutions to empower and protect workers.

it is not sufficient to stop at "being informed", no matter how much knowledge you gain. if you feel strongly about the death of the planet and remain at home posting about it and nothing else, you are bitch made and will be my servant in the afterlife.

MightyBigMinus posted:

the boomers were about the age millennia's are now in the 70s when they decided "eh gently caress it i'll just do me"

MightyBigMinus posted:

the boomers were about the age millennia's are now in the 70s when they decided "eh gently caress it i'll just do me"

mawarannahr posted:

millennial trump 2024 landslide

Rectal Death Adept posted:

it would be too distressing acknowledging it or even talking about the sources that posted it so I am going to instead have a multipage discussion about interpretations of individual words in what you posted



So when you post a report that says “EEA-NH4 is very persistent and mobile" we really need to take a look at the word "Mobile"



"Mobile" as I'm sure, to your doomer brain, makes it sound like the chemical is just going to reach every corner of the globe. Which is patently not the case.



It is very easy to prove that some areas of the earth will not be exposed to these chemicals. So my question is what do you get out of being worried about them? Why are you posting an unreasonably pessimistic take of the situation?

Also the writer of that article wrote a dumb article in the Clinton administration. Checkmate.