PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

'A cat in hell's chance'
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Climate Change
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7627

PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:42 am    Post subject: 'A cat in hell's chance' Reply with quote

A cat in hells chance why were losing the battle to keep global warming below 2C

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/19/cat-in-hells-chance-why-losing-battle-keep-global-warming-2c-climate-change

It's good to see more climate scientists calling out the 2C target. Hopefully this will lead to the injection of more realism into the global climate debate instead of that 1.5C nonsense from Paris.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
UndercoverElephant



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 8630
Location: south east England

PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

Currently about half of all global emissions are the responsibility of just of just one in 10 of the global population.


True, but misleading.

What proportion of the other 9 are emitting less by choice, and what proportion would very much like to be living a higher-emission lifestyle but are economically disadvantaged to the point where this is not a choice on offer to them?

Statistic pulled out of nowhere, but believable: fewer than 1 out of 9 are emitting less by choice, and the other 8 would emit more if the economic inequality didn't prevent it.

While grotesque inequality is morally unacceptable, and unfair, from a human rights and political point of view, it has very little to do with what this article is claiming it has to do with. It does not follow from the fact that the very rich are responsible for a disproportionate amount of emissions, that the very rich cutting their emissions would lead to a significant drop in overall emissions. It may just mean the emissions get spread around a bit more. The argument (not made in the article, but widely made elsewhere) that reducing inequality is critical for solving environmental problems does not work. How many people, if they could afford to buy and run a car, would choose not to?

The article is written by a person who has also written a book called "Cancel the Apocalypse".

I am tired of the Pollyannaism. Deal with reality or it will deal with you, and that includes accepting social and political reality.

The reality is this: we are not going to stop climate change at 2 degrees. Or 3 degrees, or 4 degrees. In fact, we are not going to stop it at all. What is actually going to happen is that it, eventually, is going to stop us, where "us" means "industrialised civilisation and humans who think they can overpopulate this planet with impunity".

The apocalypse will not be cancelled.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Automaton



Joined: 22 Jan 2016
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He's also incorrect on the data (or maybe just not thorough enough). We're not at just under 1 degree since 1880; it's more like 1.2 degrees, for the mean ocean and global temp.


https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/
_________________
Humans are a natural disaster, tidying the world to destruction and death.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7627

PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

1 degree is a better answer than 1.2 degrees. 2016 was a spike, 2017 will be cooler. It's fairer to say today's climate is around 1 degree warmer, with 2015/16 being a spike.

One year's record does not reflect the climate.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7627

PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

UndercoverElephant wrote:
Quote:

Currently about half of all global emissions are the responsibility of just of just one in 10 of the global population.


True, but misleading.

What proportion of the other 9 are emitting less by choice, and what proportion would very much like to be living a higher-emission lifestyle but are economically disadvantaged to the point where this is not a choice on offer to them?

Statistic pulled out of nowhere, but believable: fewer than 1 out of 9 are emitting less by choice, and the other 8 would emit more if the economic inequality didn't prevent it.

While grotesque inequality is morally unacceptable, and unfair, from a human rights and political point of view, it has very little to do with what this article is claiming it has to do with. It does not follow from the fact that the very rich are responsible for a disproportionate amount of emissions, that the very rich cutting their emissions would lead to a significant drop in overall emissions. It may just mean the emissions get spread around a bit more.


It's an interesting point. To a first approximation, the more you spend/consumer the higher your emissions are - hence the wealthy are responsible for most of the emissions. The most effective thing someone in the UK can do to cut their emissions is to become poorer, work less, earn less etc.

If one just redistributed the wealth, reducing inequality, I expect emissions would increase. The only guaranteed way to reduce emissions is to destroy wealth (or at least the amount people spend/consume).

It's not a case of asking rich people to spend less (they can't or won't), or taxing them more (the state would just spends more), the wealth has to actually be reduced. I guess the point Simms is making is that the poor half of the world need not become any poorer than they are now, the emission cuts can come from the wealthy.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
woodburner



Joined: 06 Apr 2009
Posts: 3372

PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Important to recognise the "wealth" is mostly debt, paid for by plundering the planet.
_________________
If you think the economy is more important than the environment, try holding your breath while you count your money.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 9807
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I unfortunately have to agree with UE that the only thing that will stop us from cooking the earth totally will be climate change itself. Hopefully, rising sea levels will be the catalyst that will precipitate the destruction of the world's financial and food production systems and result in mass human die off and the saving of at least some of our population. If our systems last long enough to completely cook the earth with 3 or 4 degrees the human die off is likely to be total.
_________________
"When the last tree is cut down, and the last river has been poisoned, and the last fish has been caught, Only then will you find out that you cannot eat money". --The Cree Indians
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 9807
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also noted that our own Chris Vernon is quoted in the article.

The West Berkshire Green Exchange, of which I am a committee member, is hosting a talk by Professor Sir Brian Hoskins on our progress on combating Climate Change on the 1st February. I will report on what he says.

Anyone who might want to come and hear what he says is welcome. PM me for details.
_________________
"When the last tree is cut down, and the last river has been poisoned, and the last fish has been caught, Only then will you find out that you cannot eat money". --The Cree Indians
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Automaton



Joined: 22 Jan 2016
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
2016 was a spike, 2017 will be cooler.


No doubt someone said 2015 was a spike, and 2014 was a spike too... I guess we'll find out if your prediction for 2017 is right.
_________________
Humans are a natural disaster, tidying the world to destruction and death.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 9807
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

1998 was a spike and 1999 was definitely cooler, as was 2000, the spike being caused by the El Nino of 1998. 2016 will likewise probably be a spike caused by the El Nino although it won't be long before the temperatures catch up again.

If anyone comes back at you next year saying that CC is a myth because 2017 is cooler just quote what was said after the 1998 El Nino and how wrong that was.
_________________
"When the last tree is cut down, and the last river has been poisoned, and the last fish has been caught, Only then will you find out that you cannot eat money". --The Cree Indians
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Potemkin Villager



Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 776
Location: Narnia

PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal - lagger wrote:


...
The West Berkshire Green Exchange, of which I am a committee member, is hosting a talk by Professor Sir Brian Hoskins on our progress on combating Climate Change on the 1st February. I will report on what he says.

...


Ken, I wonder if Sir Brian's talk gives you any reason to adopt a more optimistic view of the future of civilisation?
_________________
"Test to destruction: engineers like to do that. Only with a test to destruction can you find the outer limits of a system's strength".Kim Stanley Robinson
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 9807
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Sun Feb 05, 2017 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He was very upbeat about the future from a climate change perspective. He thought that we could achieve the goals set by scientists to mitigate climate without having to resort to any geo-engineering. He wasn't at all keen on any of the geo-engineering techniques although he didn't say anything, beyond mentioning it on a slide, about the use of biochar for sequestering carbon.

I can't see why he was so upbeat myself but then I don't think our civilisation is going to last long enough to finish the job that we have started in demolishing the ecosystems upon which we rely!
_________________
"When the last tree is cut down, and the last river has been poisoned, and the last fish has been caught, Only then will you find out that you cannot eat money". --The Cree Indians
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13968
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The thread title is apt. No-one (in relative numerical terms) gives a flying fck about global warming, as evidenced by more and more alarming headlines with no concomitant action, as in:

Record-breaking climate change pushes world into uncharted territory

Quote:
The record-breaking heat that made 2016 the hottest year ever recorded has continued into 2017, pushing the world into truly uncharted territory, according to the World Meteorological Organisation.

_________________
"Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fụck the Buddhists" - Bjork
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7627

PostPosted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal - lagger wrote:
He was very upbeat about the future from a climate change perspective. He thought that we could achieve the goals set by scientists to mitigate climate without having to resort to any geo-engineering.


Goals set by scientists or by politicians? Scientists aren't generally in a habit of setting goals and the 1.5 degree and 2 degrees goals are far more political than scientific - I also disagree with Hoskins about being able to meet these goals. The carbon arithmetic presented so clearly by Kevin Anderson makes it clear the 2 degree target is impossible without imminent, dramatic, rapid action - action which absolutely isn't forthcoming.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
johnhemming2



Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 1957

PostPosted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 10:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
The carbon arithmetic presented so clearly by Kevin Anderson makes it clear the 2 degree target is impossible without imminent, dramatic, rapid action - action which absolutely isn't forthcoming.

I have not looked at the carbon arithmetic, but I think you are probably right in the round if not the specific. The relatively mild actions so far have resulted in Trumpery.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Climate Change All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group