|
ChairMaster posted:It still seems pretty unlikely to me that the ocean's oxygen generating life will all die and the planet will run out of oxygen, considering their very short lifespan and generation time. Bacteria become immune to antibacterial drugs because the .1% or so of them that don't die just reproduce and make up an entire new generation of bacteria that will not die to the drug that killed most of the previous generation. The generation time of phytoplankton is longer than that of bacteria, but the acidification of the ocean is significantly longer than the introduction of an antibacterial drug to a population of bacteria. Anoxia from acidification killing oxygen generators is a long shot low probability event that still has a nonzero chance of happening. Comparing adaptation time scales to something like antibacterial resistance is stupid as poo poo especially when tons of studies are actually done on testing the adaptation of different seawater organisms to different pH and temperature environments throughout many-hundred generations of the organisms. For a meta-analysis, see: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.12179/full quote:The results reveal decreased survival, calcification, growth, development and abundance in response to acidification when the broad range of marine organisms is pooled together. quote:Last, the results highlight a trend towards enhanced sensitivity to acidification when taxa are concurrently exposed to elevated seawater temperature.
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
city of doves posted:even if you live in an apartment at least grow some flowers for the bees, they are going to be important and they kind of need our help right now lol if you think any fauna exist in my city beside grackles
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
city of doves posted:your job is to feed and train those grackles to disperse small pellets of sarin gas First viable solution to climate change I've seen so far.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2017 05:35
|
|
|
Current Policy Status: Even the threatening sounding crap is erring on the side of least drama: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jun/28/world-has-three-years-left-to-stop-dangerous-climate-change-warn-experts lol decarbonization in developed nations by 2050, we better enjoy our 3C of warming. I wonder how long it is before 3C becomes the new 2C. I'd set the over/under at September 2019 if I was gambling on it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 09:03
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Yes, I have noticed this, and that is exactly my problem. When I listen to what places climate researchers talk about and what people like those in this thread talk about, I find almost no overlap at all. Here is a climate researcher explaining why the Paris 2C target is bullshit all because we already haven't acted fast enough on its results: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3z4Ksy0Qa4 Maybe you should read the actual literature instead of reading one volley of ideas back and forth and thinking that you're now a climate expert. Many of us have been watching and reading papers as bystanders for years now.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:That's myopically optimistic. Yeah it's not like this is anything new. Look at what hurricane Katrina did in terms of human migration patterns.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
SSJ_naruto_2003 posted:But there's no profit in giving things away??? There is the massively lowering of the cost of the externalities that will be killing you though. Too bad externalities with cost outcomes that are erratic and not normal/gaussian like radio interference can't be modeled for poo poo!!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Radio interference of what? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem Namely quote:if trade in an externality is possible and there are sufficiently low transaction costs, bargaining will lead to a Pareto efficient outcome regardless of the initial allocation of property. Which works well with stuff like price markets on FM/AM radio bands, but it doesn't work so well with stuff like making GBS threads out carbon everywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
How do I long the ice market for when blackouts make commodity prices for it shoot thru the roof?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
FourLeaf posted:Hm. What would be the effect of nuclear winter on global warming again? Random question I swear My understanding is that it largely depends on how far from the ground it is detonated because this affects the amount of particulate that can dim solar radiation.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 00:07
|
|
|
Getting used to a more ascetic lifestyle now is good preparation for getting used to it when you have no choice later.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 00:30
|
|
|
Dang capitalism is so fuckin good at what it does. People instinctively think "Why should I give up X" not "Why do I want X altogether" when they consider not doing something.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Population control as a policy is both unnecessary and morally suspect. I guess if you won't bother citing anything I'll just lay everything out here too: - Go look at the primary differences between RCP 6 and RCP 8.5 in inputs. (hint: It's mostly population). - Go look at birth rates in countries that have received outside contraceptive and family planning aid in 3rd world countries. Oh and advocating for population control in those countries is not advocating for totalitarian rule. It's much the same as it is in the first world at this point: There's not enough access to resources for family planning, birth control, and abortions.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/SoonerTom/status/903089795345338376 God between Harvey and Irma's track I'm starting to realize I'm going to boil to death in my lifetime. I hope they measure how deep the water column was upwelled when it was hitting beaumont really soon. People should stop talking about climate change in terms of mass extinctions and should start talking about it in terms of a runaway greenhouse effect. Although to be fair, that is a kind of mass extinction. I bet the interim period in between where we get gigantic cyclones that stretch from equator to pole will be really fun too. Notorious R.I.M. fucked around with this message at 05:17 on Aug 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:The fact that these guys can't find even a single climate scientist to back them up speaks for itself. This has gone on long enough. James Hansen literally thinks a runaway greenhouse effect is possible. You're an idiot debating with other idiots. Read: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/426608/how-likely-is-a-runaway-greenhouse-effect-on-earth/ quote:A couple of years ago, he wrote: “If we burn all reserves of oil, gas, and coal, there’s a substantial chance that we will initiate the runaway greenhouse. If we also burn the tar sands and tar shale, I believe the Venus syndrome is a dead certainty.” By the way, an ECS of 4.5C is already beyond bad. Do you understand why? Also, IPCC doesn't take into account things like carbon/methane release from peatland as well, something that is being more heavily researched now. It's one of the reasons I tell idiots like you to quit using old IPCC reports.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
On one hand we have the climate nihilists who don't understand that we have ratcheted equilibria at 6C and 11C before things get truly hosed. Humanity may or may not be able to survive at each one. On the other hand, we have lil milquetoast idiots trying to cite IPCC numbers while ignoring the myriad positive feedbacks that have been researched since. Not to mention some dumbass who thinks that a current ECS range that includes 4.5C in the range is anything other than a giant alarm bell to change everything we're doing right now.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Okay. Quantify the results of these and show me how much of a difference it makes. Cite sources. The ultimate Brandolini's Principle response from an idiot that has no idea how to act under uncertainty. What a vast question, which domain should you look at? Do we talk about the fact that at 4.5C the minimum tropical cyclone pressures would be expected to decrease 70+ millibars compared to where they are now? Do we talk about increased convective potential leading to more lightning strikes in wildfire prone areas? Do we talk about the deepening thermocline in the oceans preventing upwelling from terminating storm systems? Do we talk about what sort of permanent baroclinic features may show up in the Arctic once the ice melts and the thermocline warms significantly? Do we talk about the relationships between seismological events and tropical systems and/or ice sheet collapse? Do we talk about the fact that you think business as usual is good enough when the system we're talking about generating feedbacks is literally the one that originated the term The Butterfly Effect? Would you rather just be willfully dense or is your understanding of risk really that naive? We should play poker, I love taking money from idiots.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:I certainly don't want to play poker with a stacked deck, so I'm not inclined to operate on an assumption of upper-bound ECS. However, you are absolutely right that we shouldn't play poker with "business as usual" GHG emissions either. We should cut them as quickly as possible. I'm not arguing for unrelenting emissions, just against people who literally, ("literally" meaning literally, not literally meaning figuratively), argue that we are doomed to a RCP8.5 emissions scenario. Right, we aren't going to follow a BAU path to RCP 8.5 in terms of emissions. The main concern is that lower pathways can still lead to a very high ECS beyond what was expected in the last IPCC report. I suspect that the primary GHG drivers that were not covered in the last IPCC that we will learn more about are peatland effects and Antarctic tectonics. This means that we should do everything we can now and faster than normal. While RCP 8.5 used to be "Wow that's bad we should avoid it", now we need to be talking about how RCP 2.6 is itself more dangerous than we originally thought. Sure the feedbacks are uncertain, but the fact of the matter is that outside of global dimming effects from sulfate emission / coal mining, every feedback we find just keeps ramping the temperature up. Maybe we'll have some surprises when we learn more about peatland sequestration and release. I don't have my hopes up though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
Rime posted:That's loving amazing. Generating at 25% of capacity while in the poo poo of a cat 4 hurricane? Yeah PV actually gives me hope that we'll be able to survive our stormy hellscape future to some degree. Wind farms handled Harvey fine as well Notorious R.I.M. fucked around with this message at 03:06 on Sep 27, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 03:03
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Weird that links to the nhc don't work well. You are looking at the wrong hurricane, Irma hit Antigua with hurricane force winds (although nowhere near as strong as places that received a direct hit like Barbuda) https://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/atlantic/2017/hurricane-irma
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
slaughter every imperialist pig that attempts to redevelop an island and let mangroves take back over the coasts
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
AceOfFlames posted:Hey, remember how Tesla batteries were proof that Elon Musk totally cares about the climate? You're a profoundly stupid human being
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Alpha Mayo posted:I've noticed a recent trend in calling global warming "climate change" It's because "global warming" is vague. A breakdown of the jet stream, extreme storms and rainfall, longer stationary periods of drought and inundation, and famine due to nature failing to adapt enough, is a much better all-encompassing description of how hosed we are.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
Alpha Mayo posted:So science question: Shouldn't global warming slow down? It's not a linear feedback. More carbon = stronger greenhouse effect, so more IR radiation is trapped and re-emitted back to the Earth in a feedback loop. Understanding the instantaneous climate sensitivity and equilibrium climate sensitivity of carbon emissions due to this process is ongoing research.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2017 10:21
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Yup, and absorbing large amounts of carbon in the form of carbonic acid. Lifting the lysocline in the ocean is how you kick off the real good mass extinction pulses in earnest
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
It's really amazing how fast everything in the ocean is going to be completely dead. And here I thought dying from famine would be the next generation's problem, not mine.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
Telephones posted:Do you really think that famines will occur in the first world? America especially has so much power it seems unlikely. lol
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2017 05:47
|
|
|
tsa posted:Ok Malthus. I try to do all I can to help our future, but that still doesn't cover the fact that we've basically ensured the largest extinction event in our planet's history. If talking in realistic terms scares you maybe go do something to help?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20171016-the-great-thaw-of-americas-north-is-coming lol that people were worried about clathrates. melting permafrost releases more than enough methane. I love me some nonlinear positive feedbacks
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2017 07:09
|
|
|
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/18/warning-of-ecological-armageddon-after-dramatic-plunge-in-insect-numbersquote:When the total weight of the insects in each sample was measured a startling decline was revealed. The annual average fell by 76% over the 27 year period, but the fall was even higher – 82% – in summer, when insect numbers reach their peak.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
jellyfish for everyone gonna have land jellyfish!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2017 07:01
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Not that it really matters, because if you consider climate change to be an existential threat it's total emissions that you should be watching, not per-capita emissions. otoh, per-capita emissions do make yet another compelling argument to eat the rich
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2017 23:40
|
|
|
Minge Binge posted:I can't wait till climate change gets really bad and the mainstream discourse is going to be filled with westerners pointing fingers at developing nations. Yeah I'm excited for the inflection point where news of how actually hosed we are becomes concrete instead of a bunch of spooky uncertainties. The mass grievance and acceptance of death that society is going to have to do in that lag window between realization and actualization is going to be unreal.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
What is it going to be like to see human society as a whole go through the stages of grief about its own existence.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:one way or another people are going to make some sick art It's not arson........ it's performance art.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Implying we won't just triple down on consumerism and eternal growth. I think you will be surprised how fast the dam holding our logistics infrastructure breaks when demand variance and logistic variance for essentials keeps increasing. JIT logistics is very, very fragile.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I'm sure that the atmosphere cares a whole lot about China saying the Correct Things while continuing to pollute the poo poo out of it. No you see China is a bastion of climate change beca
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
Climate papers in the 2020 - 2030 time window are gonna be fuckin wild
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:Climate papers in the 2020 - 2030 time window are gonna be fuckin wild PYF climate paper from the next decade Analysis of Hydrofracturing Potential in the West Antarctic Ice Sheet Abstract: LIDAR measurements from Operation IceBridge's Pine Island Glacier (PIG) flyover were used in tandem with neural ice fracturing models to predict when PIG buttressing failure will occur. Model results indicate that buttressing failure will occur around 2034 ± 1.4yr followed by immediate WAIS collapse yielding a 20 yr meltwater pulse (MWP) > 350Gt yr⁻¹. Results also indicate that this pulse will pass the critical threshold to shut down Antarctic Bottom Water (AABW) circulation as outlined by Hansen et. al's Ice-Climate feedback 11 ± 3.5yr after buttressing failure occurs. This research demonstrates the need for intermediate climate models to improve modeling of meltwater diffusion to better understand the strength and location of subsequent hyperbaroclinic zones. Notorious R.I.M. fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Oct 21, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 21:58 |
|
|
Salt Fish posted:You're quite the optimist if you think there will be anyone funding climate research during Trump's 2nd and 3rd term. You may be shocked to find out that there are places other than the USA where climate research occurs.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2017 22:02
|
|