[Biosphere Collapse] 420 days of blazin' it

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > [Biosphere Collapse] 420 days of blazin' it

«‹›1938 »

(Thread IKs: Stereotype)

cash crab: Apr 5, 2015; all the time i am eating from the trashcan. the name of this trashcan is ideology

oh poo poo post faster everyone

e: LOL

# ? Jul 30, 2023 16:56

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 28, 2024 09:24

Crazypoops: Jul 17, 2017

Whew

# ? Jul 30, 2023 17:07

Koirhor: Jan 14, 2008; by Fluffdaddy

so that happened

# ? Jul 30, 2023 17:07

OIL PANIC: Dec 22, 2022; CAUTIONS
_{_{...

4. ... (If the battery is exhausted, the display of the liquid crystal will become vague and difficult to look at.)

...

7. Do not use volatile oils such as thinner or benzine and alcohol for wiping.}}

Rauros posted:

shame the guardian ran this...checks notes...feminist author's opinion on climate change:

We cant afford to be climate doomers
Rebecca Solnit

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jul/26/we-cant-afford-to-be-climate-doomers
"A lot of people in this society also like certainty and while its obviously foolish to be certain we will win, somehow certainty we will lose isnt subject to the same judgments. That certainty seems to come in part from an assumption that change happens in predictable ways, so we can know the future, or that there are environmental but not social and technological tipping points. But, as the thinktank Carbon Tracker notes The S-curve is a well-established phenomenon where a successful new technology reaches a certain catalytic tipping point (typically 5-10% market share), and then rapidly reaches a high market share (i.e. 50%+) within just a couple more years once past this tipping point. Solar panels, wind turbines and lithium-ion batteries have all followed such learning curves. Each technology has declined in cost by over 90% in the past two decades. And so their growth has followed an S-curve model. Change is often not linear but exponential, or its unpredictable, like an earthquake releasing centuries of tension. Big changes start small, and history is studded with surprises."

lol
technological disruption, it curves like this,
but bio-geo-chemical disruption, it curves lie this

# ? Jul 30, 2023 17:08

mags: May 30, 2008; I am a congenital optimist.

hot tubs full of acid make excellent fisheries, what could go wrong?

# ? Jul 30, 2023 17:17

La Louve Rouge: Jun 25, 2017; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Finally we've defeated malthusianism and can return to climate optimism

# ? Jul 30, 2023 17:26

TACD: Oct 27, 2000

bowser posted:

https://twitter.com/sokurovark/status/1685376025167835136?s=46&t=J1lVrKOqDLGRcF29dzsWPA

Your body can build up tolerance to heat domes. Here's how.

7+4=12

# ? Jul 30, 2023 17:31

The Demilich: Apr 9, 2020; The First Rites of Men Were Mortuary, the First Altars Tombs.

Trabisnikof posted:

Fact Check: we were all going to die even without climate change. Everyone dies.

Not me, I'm built different.

# ? Jul 30, 2023 18:57

Notorious R.I.M.: Jan 27, 2004; up to my ass in alligators

celadon posted:

i am curious as to the mechanism by which ocean acidification is the thing that kills us all. like is the oxygen-producing capacity of cyanobacteria diminished at a pH value we are likely to hit? not to downplay things but i think every fish could die and we wouldnt all starve. ~40lb fish per capita vs ~200lb of rice per capita produced per year

The rate of surface ocean acidification is geologically novel. There is no paleoclimate analogue. Whether phytoplankton can adapt fast enough is a sort of try-it-and-see thing.

# ? Jul 30, 2023 19:13

Hubbert: Mar 25, 2007; At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

The Demilich posted:

Not me, I'm built different.

sir

you are a skeleton

# ? Jul 30, 2023 19:18

Microplastics: Jul 6, 2007; It's what's for dinner.

We're all skeletons. Some of us just have meat on our skeletons

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:14

Fozzy The Bear: Dec 11, 1999; Nothing much, watching the game, drinking a bud

https://twitter.com/NOAAClimate/status/1685711857451937793

This is super cool to play around with

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:14

Notorious R.I.M.: Jan 27, 2004; up to my ass in alligators

how many years until "aragonite" is an everyday word

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:17

mags: May 30, 2008; I am a congenital optimist.

Fozzy The Bear posted:

https://twitter.com/NOAAClimate/status/1685711857451937793

This is super cool to play around with

love to visualize my impending death

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:28

SniperWoreConverse: Mar 20, 2010; Gun Saliva

Lol it only goes 3m

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:29

smoobles: Sep 4, 2014

SniperWoreConverse posted:

Lol it only goes 3m

yeah it's not realistic. werent sea levels like 400 ft higher last time the atmosphere was this CO2 rich?

edit: lol good news, New Orleans is perfectly safe at 10ft sea level ries.

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:35

SniperWoreConverse: Mar 20, 2010; Gun Saliva

I think the same agency says if all glaciers melt we're gonna get 70 or 80m

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:36

mags: May 30, 2008; I am a congenital optimist.

Boston and nyc and all the coastal cities between at 10 feet are hosed. just a tiny slice of our future and it�s super bad haha

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:37

RandomBlue: Dec 30, 2012; hay guys!; Biscuit Hider

mags posted:

love to visualize my impending death

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:38

SniperWoreConverse: Mar 20, 2010; Gun Saliva

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-would-sea-level-change-if-all-glaciers-melted#faq

How would sea level change if all glaciers melted?
There is still some uncertainty about the full volume of glaciers and ice caps on Earth, but if all of them were to melt, global sea level would rise approximately 70 meters (approximately 230 feet), flooding every coastal city on the planet.

Seems fine

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:42

MLK Ultra: Mar 9, 2021

Fozzy The Bear posted:

https://twitter.com/NOAAClimate/status/1685711857451937793

This is super cool to play around with

i can't even flood greenacres with this

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:44

mags: May 30, 2008; I am a congenital optimist.

SniperWoreConverse posted:

https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-would-sea-level-change-if-all-glaciers-melted#faq

How would sea level change if all glaciers melted?
There is still some uncertainty about the full volume of glaciers and ice caps on Earth, but if all of them were to melt, global sea level would rise approximately 70 meters (approximately 230 feet), flooding every coastal city on the planet.

Seems fine

people will move it will be fine

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:46

Knitting Beetles: Feb 4, 2006; Fallen Rib

The beachfront real estate market will see new properties being introduced at rates that keep exceeding expectations.

# ? Jul 30, 2023 20:55

Unless: Jul 24, 2005; I art

nytimes has its own thread for a reason *and* they have a brutal long form on climate change in iraq

http://archive.today/2023.07.30-201518/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/29/world/middleeast/iraq-water-crisis-desertification.html

# ? Jul 30, 2023 21:41

celadon: Jan 2, 2023

Unless posted:

nytimes has its own thread for a reason *and* they have a brutal long form on climate change in iraq

http://archive.today/2023.07.30-201518/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/29/world/middleeast/iraq-water-crisis-desertification.html

thats a really rough read in and of itself, and like, even rougher if you have the capacity to extrapolate into the future at all

# ? Jul 30, 2023 21:57

Cithen: Mar 6, 2002; Pillbug

Ocean levels rising is useless unless we can get rid of Florida. Climate change is a big nothingburger.

# ? Jul 30, 2023 21:57

Erghh: Sep 24, 2007; "Let him speak!"

heads-up anyone out that way https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/evacuation-order-issued-canadian-town-wildfire-crosses-over-us-2023-07-30/

quote:

OSOYOOS, British Columbia, July 30 (Reuters) - An evacuation order for the Canadian town of Osoyoos and its surrounding district in the province of British Columbia had been issued late Saturday night due to an out-of-control wildfire that has crossed the border from the U.S. state of Washington.

The wildfire, called Eagle Bluff, is approximately 4 kilometres (2.49 miles) from Osoyoos and is currently estimated to be 885 hectares (2,200 acres) in size on the Canadian side of the border, according to the British Columbia Wildfire Service.

It was estimated to be around 2,000 hectares in size on the U.S. side by the BC Wildfire Service.

Osoyoos has an area population of about 6,700, according to an Osoyoos economic development website.

# ? Jul 30, 2023 22:07

TheBlackVegetable: Oct 29, 2006

mags posted:

people will move it will be fine

I'm staying put - by my reckoning, the cargo ships will be able to drop off right on my doorstep. So convenient!

# ? Jul 30, 2023 22:07

Argentum: Feb 6, 2011; UGLY LIKE BOWEL CANCER

Humans were just an evolutionary dead end tbh. Monke is way too tribal and vulnerable to short term satisfaction traps to make it past this level of society. The real space faring race is gonna be in a couple dozen million years imo. that�s why you should post now: so a bunch of octopus people can put them in a museum, but you might have to engrave your posts in stone

# ? Jul 30, 2023 22:11

Just a Moron: Nov 11, 2021

Should we organize a fund to start evacuating Florida and Arizona goons?

# ? Jul 30, 2023 22:24

mags: May 30, 2008; I am a congenital optimist.

Just a Moron posted:

Should we organize a fund to start evacuating Florida and Arizona goons?

lmao just start walking north y�all

# ? Jul 30, 2023 22:36

Jizzny Princess: Aug 24, 2021; WHILE YOU WERE LEARNING TO SPELL YOUR NAME,
I WAS BEING TRAINED TO CONQUER GALAXIES
UwU

https://twitter.com/_david_ho_/status/1685722515140644864

# ? Jul 30, 2023 23:01

Unless: Jul 24, 2005; I art

https://www.reuters.com/business/banks-vote-limit-accounting-emissions-bond-stock-sales-sources-2023-07-30/

quote:

LONDON, July 30 (Reuters) - Banks working to develop global standards on accounting for carbon emissions in bond or stock sale underwriting have voted to exclude most of these emissions from their own carbon footprint, three people familiar with the matter said.

The majority of banks comprising an industry working group backed a plan earlier this month to exclude two-thirds of the emissions linked to their capital markets businesses from being attributed to them in carbon accounting, the sources said, following months of discord over the issue.

If upheld, the decision would pit banks against environmental advocates, many of whom say the banking industry should assume full responsibility for the emissions generated by activities financed through bonds and stock sales, as it already does with loans.

Almost half of the financing provided by the six biggest U.S. banks for top fossil fuel companies came from capital markets rather than direct lending between 2016 and 2022, according to environmental group Sierra Club.

Banks' accounting of these emissions will impact their targets for becoming carbon-neutral. Major lenders have pledged to bring their emissions down to zero on a net basis by 2050, and have set interim targets for this decade.

Banks with big capital markets operations in the working group argued that they should assume responsibility for only 33% of the emissions of activities financed through bonds and stock sales because they do not have control over the borrowers as they do with loans. The banks have also expressed concern about capital market-related emissions dwarfing their lending-related emissions, the sources said.

Those pushing for a low accounting threshold say assuming responsibility for 100% of the emissions would lead to double-counting across the financial system, because bond and stock investors will also separately account for some of the emissions generated by the financing activities in their own carbon footprints.

The majority of the banks in the working group backed the 33% threshold but at least two dissented, with one advocating for 100%, the sources said, requesting anonymity because the deliberations were confidential.

The accounting standard will not be mandatory. The Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials (PCAF), an association of banks seeking to harmonise carbon accounting across the industry, formed the working group comprising major banks in the hope that others will follow the standard that emerges.

PCAF's board will now have the final say on whether to adopt the 33% accounting share for capital markets. Two of the sources said no decision had been made but it was reluctant to override the working group.

A PCAF spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

The working group's members are Morgan Stanley (MS.N), Barclays (BARC.L), Bank of America (BAC.N) Citigroup (C.N), HSBC (HSBA.L), BNP Paribas (BNPP.PA), NatWest (NWG.L) and Standard Chartered (STAN.L). Officials from all but two either declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment.

A Barclays spokesperson said the bank supported PCAF's work to establish standards for emissions and declined to comment further. A Standard Chartered spokesperson said the bank was comfortable with any emissions accounting threshold and declined to comment further.

The sources said PCAF had become frustrated at how much energy had been spent arguing over the right number, and believed any percentage was better than further delays. Publication of PCAF's final methodology has been delayed since last year because of the disagreements.

Campaign group ShareAction said the 33% weighting had been "plucked out of thin air."

"PCAF has the responsibility to publish guidance that enables a transparent and unbiased assessment of banks' climate risks and impacts," its research manager Xavier Lerin said.

It is not yet clear whether banks will have to bundle together their capital market-related emissions and their lending-related emissions into a single target, or separate them.

Having a single target but two accounting approaches for the different emissions could prove challenging, one of the sources said.

The Science Based Targets initiative, a separate body backed by the United Nations and environmental groups, is in the process of developing net-zero standards which will include whether banks should have different or combined targets.

Reporting by Tommy Reggiori Wilkes in London; Editing by Greg Roumeliotis and Rosalba O'Brien

# ? Jul 30, 2023 23:07

BCR: Jan 23, 2011

smoobles posted:

yeah it's not realistic. werent sea levels like 400 ft higher last time the atmosphere was this CO2 rich?

edit: lol good news, New Orleans is perfectly safe at 10ft sea level ries.

Well that's 70 meters and you can go hog wild to 400 meters with this:

https://www.floodmap.net/

# ? Jul 30, 2023 23:17

Pillowpants: Aug 5, 2006

BCR posted:

Well that's 70 meters and you can go hog wild to 400 meters with this:

https://www.floodmap.net/

what does the whole US look like at 70 meters?

# ? Jul 30, 2023 23:33

mags: May 30, 2008; I am a congenital optimist.

Pillowpants posted:

what does the whole US look like at 70 meters?

# ? Jul 30, 2023 23:39

Jokerpilled Drudge: Jan 27, 2010; by Pragmatica

wait are the smokers descendants of floridians?

# ? Jul 30, 2023 23:49

The Oldest Man: Jul 28, 2003

Oh boy its the biosphere thread/covid thread crossover everyone was waiting for

# ? Jul 31, 2023 00:05

BRJurgis: Aug 15, 2007; Well I hear the thunder roll, I feel the cold winds blowing...
But you won't find me there, 'cause I won't go back again...
While you're on smoky roads, I'll be out in the sun...
Where the trees still grow, where they count by one...

The Oldest Man posted:

Oh boy its the biosphere thread/covid thread crossover everyone was waiting for

The planet is healing.

# ? Jul 31, 2023 00:32

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 28, 2024 09:24

Trabisnikof: Dec 24, 2005

The Oldest Man posted:

Oh boy its the biosphere thread/covid thread crossover everyone was waiting for

that�s cheating, she�s a hardcore right winger

# ? Jul 31, 2023 00:33

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > C-SPAM > [Biosphere Collapse] 420 days of blazin' it

«‹›1938 »