Page 37 of 39 FirstFirst ... 273536373839 LastLast
Results 721 to 740 of 761

Thread: Climate Change

  1. #721
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by duke74 View Post
    For the lawyers out there...

    Attachment 17012

    When in doubt, err on the side of the environment... :-(

  2. #722
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    On the Road to Nowhere
    This was the real March madness.

    March 2024 was the warmest March ever recorded globally, scientists reported Tuesday, in data that goes back to before the Civil War. It was also the 10th month in a row that was the hottest on record, itself an ongoing record-breaking streak.
    But it was only the 17th warmest March in the U.S., so who cares?

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...4/73260522007/
    Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote. - George Jean Nathan

  3. #723
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    But it was only the 17th warmest March in the U.S., so who cares?

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...4/73260522007/
    When you compare it to last year, the changes might not seem significant, but I usually remember each spring what spring was like 20 years ago. If you think back to that, you'll be dismayed.

  4. #724
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    Economic impact of climate change

    New study out in the journal Nature on the economic impact of climate change:

    Using an empirical approach that provides a robust lower bound on the persistence of impacts on economic growth, we find that the world economy is committed to an income reduction of 19% within the next 26 years independent of future emission choices (relative to a baseline without climate impacts, likely range of 1129% accounting for physical climate and empirical uncertainty). These damages already outweigh the mitigation costs required to limit global warming to 2 C by sixfold over this near-term time frame and thereafter diverge strongly dependent on emission choices. Committed damages arise predominantly through changes in average temperature, but accounting for further climatic components raises estimates by approximately 50% and leads to stronger regional heterogeneity. Committed losses are projected for all regions except those at very high latitudes, at which reductions in temperature variability bring benefits. The largest losses are committed at lower latitudes in regions with lower cumulative historical emissions and lower present-day income.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...m_medium=email

  5. #725
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    On the Road to Nowhere
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    New study out in the journal Nature on the economic impact of climate change:

    Using an empirical approach that provides a robust lower bound on the persistence of impacts on economic growth, we find that the world economy is committed to an income reduction of 19% within the next 26 years independent of future emission choices (relative to a baseline without climate impacts, likely range of 1129% accounting for physical climate and empirical uncertainty). These damages already outweigh the mitigation costs required to limit global warming to 2 C by sixfold over this near-term time frame and thereafter diverge strongly dependent on emission choices. Committed damages arise predominantly through changes in average temperature, but accounting for further climatic components raises estimates by approximately 50% and leads to stronger regional heterogeneity. Committed losses are projected for all regions except those at very high latitudes, at which reductions in temperature variability bring benefits. The largest losses are committed at lower latitudes in regions with lower cumulative historical emissions and lower present-day income.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...m_medium=email
    Thanks for the info, I haven't commented earlier because it's just so depressing. And just try explaining this to the vast majority of Americans (and world residents) who can't see past their noses.
    Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote. - George Jean Nathan

  6. #726
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by c0d3m4str9 View Post
    When you compare it to last year, the changes might not seem significant, but I usually remember each spring what spring was like 20 years ago. If you think back to that, you'll be dismayed.
    A friend of mine has historical weather data we both accumulated 50 years ago when we had an official U.S. weather substation at our house...the differences from today are truly staggering...it's kind of working out to our benefit with the moderating temperatures here, but elsewhere it certainly is a disaster...we hope to synthesize some of this data when we have the time.

  7. #727
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    Yep

    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    Thanks for the info, I haven't commented earlier because it's just so depressing. And just try explaining this to the vast majority of Americans (and world residents) who can't see past their noses.
    It is depressing, but I hope it puts the costs in a way that more people will understand why we have to do much more to address/reduce climate change.

  8. #728
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    It is depressing, but I hope it puts the costs in a way that more people will understand why we have to do much more to address/reduce climate change.
    Distressingly unlikely when the vast majority of people figure it's something others can handle in the future...making true sacrifices hard to come by.

  9. #729
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    Maybe

    Quote Originally Posted by budwom View Post
    Distressingly unlikely when the vast majority of people figure it's something others can handle in the future...making true sacrifices hard to come by.
    Don't these people have kids or grandkids?

    I sent one of the articles on the study to a neighbor who is a climate skeptic. He once asked me what the economic cost of climate change was.

    He has three kids, ages 14-21. We'll see how he responds.

  10. #730
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    He has three kids, ages 14-21. We'll see how he responds.
    My guess is indifference. Yes, I'm a skeptic the skeptics will see the light until it is too late. And we may already be there.

  11. #731
    Quote Originally Posted by MChambers View Post
    Don't these people have kids or grandkids?

    I sent one of the articles on the study to a neighbor who is a climate skeptic. He once asked me what the economic cost of climate change was.

    He has three kids, ages 14-21. We'll see how he responds.
    The article is very dense and mathematical. Being published in Nature indicates that the research is extremely well regarded by peer experts, but I think it would be the rare neighbor who could parse its content.

    I read the following statement to indicate that income will continue to grow globally, and that the reduction in income is actually a reduction in income growth. Did you read that similarly or am I misunderstanding the intent?:

    "Even though levels of income per capita generally still increase relative to those of today, this constitutes a permanent income reduction for most regions, including North America and Europe (each with median income reductions of approximately 11%) and with South Asia and Africa being the most strongly affected (each with median income reductions of approximately 22%; Fig. 1)."

  12. #732
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by mpj96 View Post
    The article is very dense and mathematical. Being published in Nature indicates that the research is extremely well regarded by peer experts, but I think it would be the rare neighbor who could parse its content.
    I sent him one of the many articles summarizing the study. I agree that the study itself is dense.

  13. #733
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Quote Originally Posted by mpj96 View Post
    I read the following statement to indicate that income will continue to grow globally, and that the reduction in income is actually a reduction in income growth. Did you read that similarly or am I misunderstanding the intent?:

    "Even though levels of income per capita generally still increase relative to those of today, this constitutes a permanent income reduction for most regions, including North America and Europe (each with median income reductions of approximately 11%) and with South Asia and Africa being the most strongly affected (each with median income reductions of approximately 22%; Fig. 1)."
    I think you are right, but remember that this study (as I understand it) is only considering current greenhouse gas levels. As we emit more (as we are doing), the income reductions will increase significantly.

  14. #734
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Difficult to conclude anything other than when the pooky really hits the fan, it'll be the poor folks who are most strongly affected...people with money can adapt a whole lot easier, as unpleasant as it may be. As others have noted, it may already be too late to avoid a horrible crisis...it took almost 200 years to create this mess, it's not going to be solved in 20 years.

  15. #735
    Quote Originally Posted by budwom View Post
    Difficult to conclude anything other than when the pooky really hits the fan, it'll be the poor folks who are most strongly affected...people with money can adapt a whole lot easier, as unpleasant as it may be. As others have noted, it may already be too late to avoid a horrible crisis...it took almost 200 years to create this mess, it's not going to be solved in 20 years.
    This is a 4+ billion year old planet and we are talking about a 100+ window.

  16. #736
    Quote Originally Posted by Indoor66 View Post
    This is a 4+ billion year old planet and we are talking about a 100+ window.
    I can't tell whether this means you think this is an overreaction or not.

    To me, the fact that humans can undo 4 billion years of stability in one single determined century is quite alarming.

  17. #737
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    On the Road to Nowhere
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I can't tell whether this means you think this is an overreaction or not.

    To me, the fact that humans can undo 4 billion years of stability in one single determined century is quite alarming.
    Yep, some people just don't get it. The planet will be fine until the sun blows up. It's us (and our fellow fauna) who are screwed. The poorer people and more vulnerable fauna will feel it the most.

    In general, I notice a distinct and yawning chasm between the people who are going to be dead in a few years so don't care where we're headed, and the rest of the population who see what's coming and do care.
    Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote. - George Jean Nathan

  18. #738
    Quote Originally Posted by dudog84 View Post
    Yep, some people just don't get it. The planet will be fine until the sun blows up. It's us (and our fellow fauna) who are screwed. The poorer people and more vulnerable fauna will feel it the most.

    In general, I notice a distinct and yawning chasm between the people who are going to be dead in a few years so don't care where we're headed, and the rest of the population who see what's coming and do care.
    We're all going to be dead in a "few" years in geologic time, an instant.

  19. #739
    Quote Originally Posted by Indoor66 View Post
    We're all going to be dead in a "few" years in geologic time, an instant.
    I... still can't tell if you are a believer or a denier.

  20. #740
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, D.C.

    Minor quibble

    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I can't tell whether this means you think this is an overreaction or not.

    To me, the fact that humans can undo 4 billion years of stability in one single determined century is quite alarming.
    The earth hasn't been at all stable for 4 billion years. There have been periods of icehouse earth and others of hothouse earth. (Saw some really interesting PBS shows on this.)

    But your bigger point is correct: it absolutely is alarming how quickly we are causing the environment to warm outside of the conditions in which our species has been successful.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •