Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Poll

Which of these is going to be the most important component of the response to climate change?

Reducing net greenhouse gas production per capita
18 (60%)
Reducing population growth
3 (10%)
Adapting to changing temperatures and conditions
7 (23.3%)
Geoengineering and other solutions
2 (6.7%)

Total Members Voted: 28

Voting closed: January 11, 2018, 10:57:55 AM

Author Topic: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures  (Read 7294 times)

Paddy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 640
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 53
Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« on: January 04, 2018, 10:57:55 AM »
Another poll, 1 week to click as you choose. Personally, I believe that we should be addressing all of the above, but I also have my own opinion on which is most important.

Feel free to also respond by ranking them in order of importance if you so wish.

EDIT: You may change your vote if you so choose.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2018, 11:24:32 AM by Paddy »

Avalonian

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #1 on: January 04, 2018, 11:23:22 AM »
Interesting...

My feeling is that most of these are going to be forced on us, anyway - at least if the worst expectations materialise. Successful civilization in a post-crunch world will really depend on adaptation to the new conditions (at a lower population size), since I no longer believe that we're in control of those conditions. Geoengineering is, in my view, extremely dangerous and likely to be counter-productive, and will probably have all manner of negative complications; I'd prefer to see us change our ways and adapt than embark on yet more global experiments with little understanding of the outcome. So, yes: adaptation. We need to find ways of maintaining a stable society under the new normal, whatever that is once the world stabilises.

Paddy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 640
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #2 on: January 04, 2018, 11:58:55 AM »
Personally, I'm opting for net greenhouse gas emissions per capita, because this seems more malleable than population (as evidence, see the rate of change in many countries in recent years, and consider the reducing costs of renewables today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse_gas_emissions_per_capita), and if we do slow down climate change, we then make adaptation to whatever change we have a lot more feasible, whereas the reverse seems less definite.  And like Avalonian, I also don't trust geoengineering solutions.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5856
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2001
  • Likes Given: 1745
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #3 on: January 04, 2018, 02:06:34 PM »
1 is most important, 2 is second. 3 is mostly what will actually happen (in my pessimistic view). 4 is more of a hazard than a solution.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2018, 05:09:10 PM by oren »

Tor Bejnar

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 640
  • Likes Given: 321
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #4 on: January 04, 2018, 03:51:48 PM »
There is "most important" as in "smartest", and then there is "most important" as in what society actually does. 

Reducing atmospheric greenhouse gas (not just reducing net production), in my opinion, is our smartest way forward; this would include geoengineering (scrubbing CO2).  I fear that Earthlings (including the homo sapiens variety) will mostly attempt to adapt, but with widespread failure, will experience population reductions.

Therefore, I am not able to discern a “most important”!
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #5 on: January 04, 2018, 05:36:02 PM »
We have to reduce GHG.  Per capita, per country, and per planet.

We are reducing population growth and we will almost certainly lower population numbers but this will be too slow to make much impact in the short term.

We have to adapt to changing climate and rising sea level.  And we'll have to do more as time goes forward.  There's too much heat buildup in the system to avoid significant changes.

It is extremely important to keep looking for geoengineering solutions.  Even after we hit 'zero' GHG emissions we have to figure out how to pull some of the CO2 back out of the atmosphere.  And we might be forced to take extreme measures if things get really, really bad.

I need an "All of the Above" button.

Rascal Dog

  • New ice
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 0
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #6 on: January 04, 2018, 05:59:01 PM »
I need an "All of the Above" button.

Me too.

A-Team

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 392
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2018, 07:16:19 PM »
Of the 24,000 attendees at the big fly-in climate science meeting of the year -- AGU2017 in New Orleans -- 5 noted humorously how many fellow passengers were carrying poster tubes, 3 took public transportation, 2 twittered about how deplorable it all was, 1 stated hardly any face-to-face networking really takes place at meetings, 0 mentioned Skype/Facetime virtual meeting technology, and an additional 0 suggested putting all the talks online so people would not be disadvantaged by not attending.

These numbers do not add up for me. But they are no worse than those in the environmental community. So if the two groups best informed and most concerned about climate change are doing so little, even less sacrifice can be expected from the general public.

Replacing 236,000,000 US passenger gas vehicles with 236,000,000 electric cars? Turning off faucet during teeth brushing? Meatless Mondays? Living simply so that others may simply live (1965) -- has that caught on? What's under discussion is not remotely enough, soon enough.

I haven't seen significant movement towards a timely and proportionate response and don't expect one. So the best option seems to be early societal collapse.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #8 on: January 04, 2018, 08:49:27 PM »
Quote
So the best option seems to be early societal collapse.

A societal collapse is not something that would abruptly happen but build gradually.

Unlike the false meme about the frog in the pot as the temperature rises the frog gets out.

Avalonian

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #9 on: January 04, 2018, 09:36:53 PM »
The frog might jump out, but society as a whole..? The problem is of course that we're looking at a system where the result is already fixed once the catastrophes begin to pile up. As A-Team says, the sooner that societal collapse happens within that context, the less damage is ultimately done. But no, of course it's won't be an instantaneous process whatever happens; it just needs to be dramatic enough that the survivors are finally weaned onto a renewable society.

I see the development of renewable energy as vital, because we'll be dependent on it when the recovery phase starts. In the best-case scenario, I'm imagining a highly technological and much cleaner society with minimal fossil fuel use, ubiquitous recycling, and probably with components of extraplanetary colonisation. That may be deeply over-optimistic, but the only chance we'll have of achieving it is to preserve as much of our knowledge as we can through the crisis interval. That means being ready, as soon as possible, to deal with the crises in the most effective ways we can: local food generation, minimal transportation, and widespread skill-sharing.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #10 on: January 04, 2018, 09:45:16 PM »
If you look around you will see countries, states(provinces, whatever), and cities jumping around.  Building up momentum to get out of the pot.

" a system where the result is already fixed once the catastrophes begin to pile up"

Oh, come on.  We get hit by huge problems, suffer, and get to work.  That's the story of humankind.  "Societal collapse" is the stuff of movies made for adolescents, in body or mind.

We have to move to a low carbon, sustainable input lifestyle.  We're moving there.  Too slowly right now but we are accelerating.  Millions will likely die because we are moving too slowly but as the heat gets turned up we'll move faster.  To a large extent the heat has to get uncomfortable for the 'decision makers'.



Paddy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 640
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #11 on: January 04, 2018, 09:51:10 PM »
I need an "All of the Above" button.

Me too.

Sorry, it seemed too much of a clear winner.

Avalonian

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #12 on: January 04, 2018, 10:09:43 PM »
" a system where the result is already fixed once the catastrophes begin to pile up"

Oh, come on.  We get hit by huge problems, suffer, and get to work.  That's the story of humankind.  "Societal collapse" is the stuff of movies made for adolescents, in body or mind.
Bob, there are too many components of our current system that are not sustainable, mainly related to food supply. At some point, that is going to collapse, especially when exacerbated by climate change that removes large parts of the supply. These things will take years, but major famines are, to me, catastrophes. When they're no longer isolated events in foreign lands, and we start to get real and major changes to policies globally as a result, there will be enough inertia built into the climate system that it will keep getting worse for a good while. To me, our best option is to build in as much flexibility as we can pre-emptively.
 
We have to move to a low carbon, sustainable input lifestyle.  We're moving there.  Too slowly right now but we are accelerating.  Millions will likely die because we are moving too slowly but as the heat gets turned up we'll move faster.  To a large extent the heat has to get uncomfortable for the 'decision makers'.
Agreed. You seem to be thinking that I'm saying we'll all go extinct, when I'm actually arguing the same thing as you... although I suspect your suggestion of 'millions' is missing a few zeros. Guessing blindly, I'd be surprised if more than half the world population made it through the crisis, which may be protracted over a few decades. To me, that is a societal collapse, and I hope we keep the clean technology through to the other side.

Societies collapse when they grow beyond sustainability. It's happened numerous times in the past, and I strongly suspect that despite our technological cleverness, we're not immune to it.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5856
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2001
  • Likes Given: 1745
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #13 on: January 04, 2018, 10:23:31 PM »
What's under discussion is not remotely enough, soon enough.

I haven't seen significant movement towards a timely and proportionate response and don't expect one. So the best option seems to be early societal collapse.
Fully agree. We are moving and doing good stuff, we need to keep doing it but it's too little too late. Hopefully some of the stuff survives past the collapse.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #14 on: January 04, 2018, 10:37:53 PM »
Quote
mainly related to food supply. At some point, that is going to collapse, especially when exacerbated by climate change that removes large parts of the supply. These things will take years

And during those years farmers will change the crops they grow (which is already happening).  Some food production will move 'indoors' (which is already happening).  And ag will probably migrate closer to the poles (don't know if this is happening yet, best check with Canada).

Beef will get more expensive which will mean less beef production, freeing land for human food crops.

Quote
your suggestion of 'millions' is missing a few zeros. Guessing blindly, I'd be surprised if more than half the world population made it through the crisis,

Already millions die of starvation or starvation related disease.  The annual die off rate might make it into the tens of millions in the worst years. 

Half the world's population?  I highly doubt that.

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #15 on: January 04, 2018, 11:05:12 PM »
When I read this earlier today I got stuck on the first option. GHG production per capita is not my countrys biggest problem, it's more GHG emissions per capita thanks to our consumption in other countries, flying and shipping, which are not included in the summaries made by Naturvårdsverket (Swedish EPA). And yes, it's a tiny country, but it's my viewpoint and we have exeptional prerequisites compared to most western nations. What disturbs me, is when I read about others who use Sweden as a good example for succesful mitigation. In reality, we have done very little. We have topped up our ~40% hydro and ~40% nuclear (we already had those), with ~10% Wind and sold our lignite to EPH. We have also started to buy EVs. We have ~5M cars here. A lot of diesels and we are now talking about diesel free inner cities in 2020 while attacking car manufacturers for faking test results.  ::)
We also have our famous Nobel foundation who still invests in coal and oil. Here's a recent hugely popular (not) video with climate action and 59 views (don't worry, it's a bit of English in there as well):


Cross posting this from the cars thread because it contains a translation and I'm lazy, attaching the same image below.
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,438.msg137768.html#msg137768
The blue line is what we "should" be doing (in theory ... ), the red line is a more "viable" option considering politics and economy. We're not doing either.

236M cars in the US, as A-Team wrote above. How many cars and trucks are sold world wide every year? 100M? But still, shifting to EVs should not be too hard although it will also add further emissions. But as soon as we really start to optimize our efforts to lower emissions, the challenges get harder, and harder, just like the attached simplified image for Sweden depicts. Reaching 1-2M per capita must be a huge challenge for any western nation.

Also cross posting this from the Paris 2015 thread with Kevin Andersons lecture:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,1021.msg137267.html#msg137267

So which option should I vote for (and what time span)? I really hate the last one, but that might actually be the only one left.

Good night.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Avalonian

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2018, 11:07:38 PM »
And during those years farmers will change the crops they grow (which is already happening).  Some food production will move 'indoors' (which is already happening).  And ag will probably migrate closer to the poles (don't know if this is happening yet, best check with Canada).

Beef will get more expensive which will mean less beef production, freeing land for human food crops.
Changing crops will help to some extent, although it's not quick or easy, for all sorts of reasons (soil type quality, pest resilience, nutrient requirements)...  but whether indoor or outdoor, you still need a water supply, which may simply not be there in many areas (see the models for, e.g.,  western US, southern Europe and the Middle East). And have you looked into how long it takes to develop Arctic soils into something productive? You can't just move in and start growing. It's not something you can do as a reaction, when you need to - it's possible, but it takes a few years of preparation, even assuming that we can model where the new weather patterns are going to allow high productivity.
    You're assuming that we'll just switch to a different system when we need to, without any major failures along the line. I'm saying we need to anticipate all those failures, and make our local food supplies as robust as possible, starting now. I say local, because how many places are currently self-sufficient for food? (Not many.) What happens when there are shortages in your supply areas, and exports are held to feed the locals there? Rich countries will be insulated for a long while, but then suddenly there just won't be any supplies available... and it won't just be lettuces and beefburgers.
   
Already millions die of starvation or starvation related disease.  The annual die off rate might make it into the tens of millions in the worst years. 

Half the world's population?  I highly doubt that.
And I sincerely hope that you're right. I just really don't think you are... It's like sea ice: each 'worst' year will be followed by a yet worse one, until the climate finds a new normal. That might be some time away.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #17 on: January 04, 2018, 11:18:52 PM »
Quote
shifting to EVs should not be too hard although it will also add further emissions

If we were scared enough our governments would simply state that starting in 5 (some low number) of years from now it will illegal to sell ICEVs.  All light vehicles will have to be either EVs or PHEVs with at least 30 (some modest range) electric miles.

That would be more than enough time for manufacturers to design the vehicles they don't already have and more than enough time to build the needed battery factories.

There would be an overall drop in emissions. 

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 7695
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1061
  • Likes Given: 504
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #18 on: January 04, 2018, 11:26:04 PM »
I've just watched Geostorm today, so definitely not the last option!

Just kidding. What a horrible movie. In comparison The Day After Tomorrow looks like a multiple Oscar winner.  ;)
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #19 on: January 04, 2018, 11:26:25 PM »
Quote
have you looked into how long it takes to develop Arctic soils into something productive?

I'm not talking about Arctic soils.  But more ag moving into Canada and northern Europe.  Olives and oranges moving into areas where they would not grow in the past.

We may have to change what we eat.  I already mentioned beef getting more expensive.  Perhaps we'll eat more turnips and rutabaga or whatever thrives in areas opening up to ag.  Perhaps we'll do more hydroponic as opposed to in soil food production.


Quote
we need to anticipate all those failures, and make our local food supplies as robust as possible, starting now. I say local,

It would be great if we could get ahead of the problem but that isn't how humans operate.  We respond after the pain gets strong enough to force us into action.

Local.  Eat locally if the food you need is grown locally.  But as we move to electric transportation eating locally becomes less necessary. 

A-Team

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 392
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #20 on: January 05, 2018, 12:38:54 AM »
California today grows an inordinate percentage of human food produced in the Northern Hemisphere. It's the 8th largest country in the world in terms of GDP.

It has the most intensely studied meteorology of any place on the planet, but no one seems able to assure us when or if 'the rains will follow the plow'. Their ag is entirely irrigated, wholly dependent on current year Colorado Basin and Sierra snowpacks.

I could see collapse of California food production happening over a very short time frame, say 1-2 more years of this so-called drought which in my view isn't part of any textbook 'drought cycle' but rather a systemic reconstruction of Pacific Ocean weather patterns and overturning currents that's here to stay.

The entire California ecosystem is changing over in front of our eyes. Forests in the western US cannot reseed, so much for bogus carbon capture credits there:

http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Scorched-by-fierce-fires-parts-of-California-and-12464399.php
https://phys.org/news/2017-12-forest-resilience-declines-wildfires-climate.html
[/quote]

We do not grow any food at all here in Arizona beyond some irrigated pecans and citrus. Please don't talk to me about backyard gardens, farm to fork, compost piles or eating local lizards and withered cactus pads. New Mexico at least has artisanal hot peppers; Nevada absolutely nothing. Each of these states is the size of France.

However, as traditionally hospitable people, we would welcome 38,000,000 Californian immigrants (as well as 165,000,000 from Central America) as long as they didn't stay too long. We could provide generous incentives such as one way bus tickets (like we give the homeless) to homestead the Canadian Shield, boreal peat bogs, Arctic tundra and Northern Rockies.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2018, 12:49:07 AM by A-Team »

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18795
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2055
  • Likes Given: 255
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #21 on: January 05, 2018, 12:38:59 AM »
I chose population reduction as it goes together with a socio-economic collapse.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18795
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2055
  • Likes Given: 255
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #22 on: January 05, 2018, 01:44:52 AM »
California today grows an inordinate percentage of human food produced in the Northern Hemisphere. It's the 8th largest country in the world in terms of GDP.

In 2015 California had the 6th largest GDP in the world (and it still maintains this ranking) ;D:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/02/10/heres-how-big-californias-economy-really-is/

Edit: The projections are that when the 2017 numbers have been compiled that California will most likely pass the UK and move in a 5th place ranking on GDP:

Title: "California the world’s fifth largest economy? Look out, Britain"

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article161472333.html

Extract: "California’s economy ranked sixth in the world in 2016, according to rankings released by Palo Alto economist Stephen Levy on Friday. That’s the same as the year before, when California overtook France and Brazil. But the state’s economy isn’t stagnating; California’s economy is growing so quickly that Levy thinks the state will overtake the United Kingdom this year for No. 5."
« Last Edit: January 05, 2018, 01:55:59 AM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #23 on: January 05, 2018, 11:56:14 AM »
Quote
shifting to EVs should not be too hard although it will also add further emissions

If we were scared enough our governments would simply state that starting in 5 (some low number) of years from now it will illegal to sell ICEVs.  All light vehicles will have to be either EVs or PHEVs with at least 30 (some modest range) electric miles.

That would be more than enough time for manufacturers to design the vehicles they don't already have and more than enough time to build the needed battery factories.

There would be an overall drop in emissions.
I agree.

But the Swedish goal is an 80% reduction of fossil fuels in the transport sector between 2010-2030, which translates into about a 60% reduction in CO2 emissions from the transport sector, obviously depending on how the target is met.

And that was the easy part, of what I tried to express in my post above.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1004
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 151
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #24 on: January 05, 2018, 02:48:11 PM »
I have to agree with Oren and Tor, I feel that we will have to adapt because I feel that we just won't be able to cut our emission as fast as needed. There is that Jevons paradox that kills us. Some years ago, I was hoping that peak oil would help, but oil prodution is just going further up with more CO2 intensive extraction methods... coal consumption doesn't really go down...
Adapting is quite an issue, hope we won't do it the way Syria adapted itself to the drought. That was not so efficient, but the drought was probably not the only problem.
Constrained adaptation usually doesn't bring great results, but I don't see any real action to change things.
I remember in the '90 activists saying that gasoline should cost 5 EUR equivalent per liter. We are still just above 1 EUR per liter in Luxembourg. Why ??? I don't believe that taxes will save us, but energy is so cheap that energy investments (excepted LED lightnings and improved management/regulation) need too much time to bring a ROI .

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2708
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 157
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #25 on: January 05, 2018, 03:35:25 PM »
"Reducing population growth" doesn't reduce population. Even if population declines a little, this doesn't help much and the emissions problem really is from bringing the poorest up to nearer western living standards. So this option isn't going to do a lot.

Geoengineering can be risky but depends what is meant. Sucking CO2 out of air might be considered geoengineering and good but is really just reversing the geoengineering we have done. Other than this, looks risky and while I don't completely rule out such measures as temporary measure until sucking CO2 out of atmosphere has time to do enough, looks too risky and so hope we don't have much of these other options.

So those two options look like weak effects at best.

Adapting, we will certainly have to do some of this.

So adapting and emissions reductions certainly seem main two to me.

To arrive at single answer, how do you measure the amount of adapting that has to be done in a way to compare against expecting say 80% reduction in emissions by 2050 and over 100% by 2060?

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #26 on: January 05, 2018, 03:57:45 PM »
The fewer people we have, the less renewable electricity we need to generate.  Lowing population growth won't reduce the current population level but it will limit the number of people who need energy when we do hit peak population.

And after peak population there are plenty of signs that population levels will drop.  We have already seen population peak in many countries who are now experiencing population decrease.

There is a very simple solution for the emissions problem in bringing the poorest up to western living standards.  Do not use fossil fuels for that growth.

Developed countries need to assist developing countries install renewable energy.  And make no money available for building fossil fuel plants.
--

Sucking CO2 out of the atmosphere is geoengineering.  And we really, really need to figure out how to suck CO2 and sequester it.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5856
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2001
  • Likes Given: 1745
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #27 on: January 05, 2018, 04:46:11 PM »
"Reducing population growth" doesn't reduce population. Even if population declines a little, this doesn't help much and the emissions problem really is from bringing the poorest up to nearer western living standards. So this option isn't going to do a lot.
When taken in the context of a significant slowdown in births, reducing population growth in relatively developed countries saves a lot of energy and resources spent on construction of new housing, schools, roads, restaurants, shops etc., as the existing infrastructure is sufficient for the existing population. Replacement and improvement are still necessary, but new stock is sharply reduced.
All this is of academic interest as unfortunately this (a significant and quick slowdown in births from current rates) is not going to happen.
Of course, reducing emissions per capita, as well as reducing consumption per capita in developed countries, is quicker and more important.

Edit reason: Bob's question
« Last Edit: January 05, 2018, 07:24:13 PM by oren »

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #28 on: January 05, 2018, 05:46:44 PM »
Quote
All this is of academic interest as unfortunately this is not going to happen.

What is not going to happen?  Population drops?

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW?year_high_desc=false

Sort on 2016 population growth.  Look at the countries that have already gone negative and how many are close to zero. 

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3100
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 751
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #29 on: January 05, 2018, 06:33:04 PM »
Reducing net greenhouse gas production per capita

I think it is too late for this to work as a climate change deterrent. While it is an absolute priority that we do this, even if we bring down human emissions to manageable levels in the next 10 year, there is a whole lot of hurt coming our way. We might have changed the earth too much already. Reducing emissions is about helping the next generations. For our generation it is too late.

Reducing population growth

I think this will happen without any human guidance. Droughts, fires, heatwaves, storms, and other climate disruptions will lead to political instability, famine, mass migration and war. I think overpopulation is a problem solved by climate change.


Adapting to changing temperatures and conditions

I think this will will happen whether we want to or not. Some will adapt to the new climate, many won’t. It is not a choice. We will either adapt or fail to adapt. Sure, preparing for climate change might increase the chance of successful adaptation, but it is by no means certain.
 
Geoengineering and other solutions

We are already geoengineering the planet ina scale that no geoengineering effort can match. we are changing the chemical composition of the atmosphere and the oceans, we are changing the surface of the planet and we have dramatically changed the Earth’s ecosystems. We are making those changes assuming that the the Earth is infinite and eternal. The illusion that a habitable Earth is here for us is strong. We have given no thought about the consequences of our geoengineering.


Unintentional geoengineering got us to this point. Intentional, well planned and carefully executed geongineering might gets  us out. However I don’t think it will happen until it is too late for many. As Climate change becomes increasingly obvious, resistance to geoengineering won’t make sense (imminent destruction will see to that) and governments of the world will be much more willing to risk and finance planned geoengineering.  Geoengineering will be done not as a preventive measure but as a Hail Mary.

I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1215
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #30 on: January 05, 2018, 08:10:54 PM »
Quote
All this is of academic interest as unfortunately this is not going to happen.

What is not going to happen?  Population drops?

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW?year_high_desc=false

Sort on 2016 population growth.  Look at the countries that have already gone negative and how many are close to zero.

These numbers are still a drama. The countries with negative growth , that is only because of immigration. But they still have a positive birth rate.

If you look at these numbers for Africa, they will still be with 2,4 billion people by 2050. From 1,2 billion today. And 470 million in 1980. And Europe already looks like an african colony.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #31 on: January 05, 2018, 08:38:59 PM »
Quote
The countries with negative growth , that is only because of immigration. But they still have a positive birth rate.

Incorrect.

Go the Wiki Total Fertility Rate page and sort countries by TFR.  As you scan down the lists you will first see the countries which have TFRs below replacement rates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependencies_by_total_fertility_rate#Country_ranking_by_verified_TFR_and_estimate

If you want to dig a bit further you will find that most countries have dropping birth rates.   The world TFR has been dropping over years and is now in the 2.4 to 2.5 range.  Replacement rate is 2.1.




Much of the population growth we see comes from longer lifespans, not increased births.




Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1215
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #32 on: January 05, 2018, 08:47:53 PM »
It's not incorrect, you see it yourself. Syria , 6 years war. Puerto Rico, where have they been going ? All these east-european countries, where are they ? All immigration.



Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1215
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #33 on: January 05, 2018, 08:49:05 PM »
And 2,4 is still positive, not.

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8661
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3405
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #34 on: January 05, 2018, 09:06:05 PM »
About 10 years ago, in an outside cafe in Kiev, I got talking to an African-American diplomat from the USA. After much alcohol he said "to be black in the Ukraine is shit, but Russia was even worse."

I guess not much has changed.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1215
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #35 on: January 05, 2018, 09:06:27 PM »
Reality is that the global population is growing faster than ever before. In 1960 the population was growing at 2 %, for a population of 3 billion. Today it's growing at 1,2 % for a population of 7,6 billion people. In 2017 that was almost 90 million people extra. More than half of them in Africa.

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1215
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #36 on: January 05, 2018, 09:10:28 PM »
About 10 years ago, in an outside cafe in Kiev, I got talking to an African-American diplomat from the USA. After much alcohol he said "to be black in the Ukraine is shit, but Russia was even worse."

I guess not much has changed.

Just tell that black American to mind his own business. We don't need Americans to boycot European nationalist parties. With their suicide globalist policy. If the US wants these Africans, come and get them. There are hundreds of millions that would love to go to the US.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2018, 09:18:45 PM by Alexander555 »

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #37 on: January 05, 2018, 09:16:54 PM »
Reality is that the global population is growing faster than ever before. In 1960 the population was growing at 2 %, for a population of 3 billion. Today it's growing at 1,2 % for a population of 7,6 billion people. In 2017 that was almost 90 million people extra. More than half of them in Africa.

The rate of growth is slowing.  As the rate slows population growth slows. 



As your graph shows we reach a point at which growth per year slows and peaks.

As I showed you earlier, most of the population growth is due to longer lifespans.  The world should soon be a replacement rate and this is likely to drop below.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #38 on: January 05, 2018, 09:19:26 PM »

 Europe already looks like an african colony.

 If the US wants these Africans, come and get them. There are hundreds of millions that would love to go to the US.

Racist much?

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1215
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #39 on: January 05, 2018, 09:28:06 PM »
You may call it whatever you want. You want a couple hundred million extra ?   How many people you already have in California that are lacking running water because there pits went dry. Because big companies drilled deeper pits. You are exhausting your country in every possible way. And a little later on you probably think it is your right to move to any place you want and do the same there. You are wrong, it's not your right.

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #40 on: January 05, 2018, 09:36:40 PM »
Seems to be a bit of confusion around the wording of the options, when reading some comments above. Maybe it's just me but I'll give this one more go, on how I read it.

Relative importance of countermeasures
Which of these is going to be the most important component of the response to climate change?
Time span = future.

Reducing net greenhouse gas production per capita
Not happening fast enough and it will likely get harder in the future (as I tried to express above).

Reducing population growth
Here I was thinking along the lines of the now late Hans Rosling and his many talks about population growth, which he claimed will be levelling out in the future around 11 billion (if humans manage this intelligently...). And all of that is the opposite of a collapse, of any kind.

Adapting to changing temperatures and conditions
Some on this planet are already doing that, without countermeasures. They just have to move, more of that to come in the future. While that is a response, it's not mitigating climate change.

Geoengineering and other solutions
The only one left as I saw it, but what does Paddy mean with "other solutions"?

Think I'll just remove my vote for now. :)
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #41 on: January 05, 2018, 10:16:47 PM »
You may call it whatever you want. You want a couple hundred million extra ?   How many people you already have in California that are lacking running water because there pits went dry. Because big companies drilled deeper pits. You are exhausting your country in every possible way. And a little later on you probably think it is your right to move to any place you want and do the same there. You are wrong, it's not your right.

Translation:

I've got mine.  Screw everyone else.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #42 on: January 05, 2018, 10:22:05 PM »
Quote
Reducing net greenhouse gas production per capita
Not happening fast enough and it will likely get harder in the future (as I tried to express above).

Should get easier as we go along.  Technology improves and costs drop.

For example:  We now have electric buses that are full replacements (size and adequate range) for diesel transit buses.  Lifetime costs are cheaper.  Purchase prices are likely to drop further as battery prices drop. 

We can replace diesel city buses with e-buses and save money.

Quote
Reducing population growth
Here I was thinking along the lines of the now late Hans Rosling and his many talks about population growth, which he claimed will be levelling out in the future around 11 billion (if humans manage this intelligently...). And all of that is the opposite of a collapse, of any kind.

That number seems too high based on current decreases in TFRs.



morganism

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 205
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #43 on: January 06, 2018, 02:29:46 AM »

Iron fertilization of the ocean is as natural as whale poop

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/01/iron-fertilization-of-the-ocean-is-as-natural-as-whale-poop-and-it-can-save-the-planet.html

"Adding iron to ocean via humans using boats or whales pooping or dust storms can trigger large phytoplankton blooms on the order of 100,000 kilograms of plankton per kilogram of iron. 5000 tons of iron in Sperm Whale poop could create 500 million tons of plankton.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3100
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 751
  • Likes Given: 195
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #44 on: January 06, 2018, 02:37:29 AM »
Quote
Iron fertilization of the ocean is as natural as whale poop

And if you have a 1 million (billion?) times increase in whale poop the disruption it causes to the environment could generate more climate change than global warming. Like the old adage says, the difference between medicine and poison is the dosage.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

Alexander555

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1215
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 120
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #45 on: January 06, 2018, 08:21:22 AM »
You may call it whatever you want. You want a couple hundred million extra ?   How many people you already have in California that are lacking running water because there pits went dry. Because big companies drilled deeper pits. You are exhausting your country in every possible way. And a little later on you probably think it is your right to move to any place you want and do the same there. You are wrong, it's not your right.

Translation:

I've got mine.  Screw everyone else.

Translation:

We created an army of murderers in Mexico. And we don't care they put other people's head on top of a stick. As long we can fill our pockets with printed money.

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 125
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #46 on: January 06, 2018, 08:45:55 AM »
Quote
Reducing net greenhouse gas production per capita
Not happening fast enough and it will likely get harder in the future (as I tried to express above).

Should get easier as we go along.  Technology improves and costs drop.

For example:  We now have electric buses that are full replacements (size and adequate range) for diesel transit buses.  Lifetime costs are cheaper.  Purchase prices are likely to drop further as battery prices drop. 

We can replace diesel city buses with e-buses and save money.
Please look at the picture I presented in my first post, read the rest of it and try to understand my point of view. Mitigation is not just about EVs and analogies to computing power and miniaturizing components. That's more like the low hanging fruits. And I think Sweden is a good present example here.

I think Kevin Andersons numbers fit very well; a ~75% reduction in CO2 by 2025 and a ~fully decarbonized energy by around 2035. And that's for Sweden, with ~90% "emission free" energy today. Let's say we do that, then we'll have to fix all our other problems like our agriculture and old nuclear plants. Those fixes will not be easy and emissions free. Then add the fact that we are trying to do all of these optimization efforts (that will get harder and more expensive along with lower emissions) with (demands for) an increasing GDP. 
Even if the entire world would do that (to any year of choice in the future), then we will still be far above 285ppm in the atmosphere.

Quote
Quote
Reducing population growth
Here I was thinking along the lines of the now late Hans Rosling and his many talks about population growth, which he claimed will be levelling out in the future around 11 billion (if humans manage this intelligently...). And all of that is the opposite of a collapse, of any kind.

That number seems too high based on current decreases in TFRs.
He would probably adjust to current rates if he was alive.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 7695
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1061
  • Likes Given: 504
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #47 on: January 06, 2018, 09:59:45 AM »
Translation:

I've got mine.  Screw everyone else.

Translation:

We created an army of murderers in Mexico. And we don't care they put other people's head on top of a stick. As long we can fill our pockets with printed money.[/quote]

You've had your back and forth, let off some steam, now back to regular programming, please.  :)
Il faut comparer, comparer, comparer, et cultiver notre jardin

Avalonian

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #48 on: January 06, 2018, 10:00:47 AM »
Quote
Iron fertilization of the ocean is as natural as whale poop

And if you have a 1 million (billion?) times increase in whale poop the disruption it causes to the environment could generate more climate change than global warming. Like the old adage says, the difference between medicine and poison is the dosage.

Quite. Iron fertilisation on a scale that makes a difference is a fast track to large-scale oceanic anoxia, hydrogen sulphide release and generally death. I can't believe people are still promoting this.

The link to whales is spurious; they're just recycling iron that is already in the system, and it's one of the limiting nutrients. Add lots more iron, and you do indeed get large phytoplankton blooms... they then sink, decay, use up all the oxygen in the water column, and kill everything. Nice plan.

Plus the experiments that ran in the early 2000s showed that it doesn't even create enhanced fisheries to allow someone to get rich from it - the nutrients don't get into the higher levels of the food chain. I suspect it might be manageable safely in carefully selected areas by fertilising gradually, and increasing the nutrient flux over many years, but you've got to generate a stable and efficient ecological recycling system before it leads to anything but disaster - basically, mimic an upwelling zone. Even even entirely natural upwelling areas tend to have reduced benthic oxygen levels and be associated with Oxygen Minimum Zones, however.

Paddy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 640
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #49 on: January 06, 2018, 01:17:55 PM »
I'm not at all convinced by iron fertilisation, or by grand geoengineering schemes.

I'm also not at all convinced of the forecast of population collapse through famine etc. Any event so drastic as to kill tens of millions of people will also lead to more births surely after, as people have more kids when and after times are unstable.