Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Climate Catastrophe Chat  (Read 10527 times)

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Climate Catastrophe Chat
« on: November 30, 2021, 12:44:08 AM »
Just like in the COVID and COP26 threads; let's just chat away here about climate change, climate disturbance, or global warming... Whatever you want to call it...
I like to call it the "Climate Catastrophe" now...

Starting off with a video I was just watching...

« Last Edit: November 30, 2021, 12:56:36 AM by Freegrass »
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #1 on: November 30, 2021, 01:29:29 PM »
Several points:
1) chatting about it is not a solution (arguably it is a current policy but that is not what the video is about.
2) The fact that you watched a video doe not tell us anything. A short description on what the video shows might help.
3) So basically you made this thread because you feel the need to chat. Not sure how many would chat along.

So first off what does the movie show? What does it teach us? What is it that you/we should talk about?
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

squilliam

  • New ice
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2021, 05:51:58 PM »
Talking 'bout my generational catastrophie...

Anyway since this is gonna be my first post, I may as well reply to Freegrass because they're asking for it.

It's kind of funny to think about where I was around 20 years ago when I started as a youthful activist for climate change mitigation, when Kyoto was aspirational rather than a long lost dream. I figured action was just around the corner and I just needed to agitate just a little harder with others to get it over the line to meaningful change. Now I am almost a cheerleader for climate catastrophe. It's not happening fast enough and yet it's happening so fast that I can't believe it.


If there is anything 'good' to say about the current state of the Arctic is that I'm glad it's on the opposite hemisphere to me. It's kind of nice knowing that the first real tangible catastrophe is likely to affect the actual responsible parties much more than the global south. I'm also glad that we simply have no idea what the consequence is going to stabilize to -- will the Arctic run AMOK; or, AMOC will not run?


I used to think that rational arguments and aspirational goals to make the world a better place would actually move the world to be better. It turns out the biggest opposition to making the world better wasn't the conservative 'other', but the 'liberal' or 'progressive' friend. It's because aesthetics, self-interest and ideology worked in tandem to reduce effective action to greenwashing as all the effective and cheap options were swept off the table. I guess conservatives were right to argue that climate change wasn't serious if people couldn't get over nuclear waste -- if you don't do what is easy why expect us to do what is hard?


Black lives matter because black lungs never did? It's the tyranny of perception that causes the powerful to target problems that keep them up at night like the specter of nuclear war rather than the constant cough of a sick child that they never hear. The irrelevant and the trivial are sweeping the table clear of the meaningful and real in our brave new world. However, Brave New World is not my book, so if they give you ruled paper write the other way. Fahrenheit 451 is my favourite political book I read at high-school. My favourite temperature is 287K, because 290K is so close that it's almost not worth worrying about -- climate deniers have been right all along, a <1% change in global temperature is barely going to move the needle...  ::)



kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2021, 02:17:02 AM »
Welcome squilliam.

Yeah long ago when we agreed regulated the CFCs you would think the hydrocarbons were next. In a a nice perfect world which this is not.

PS: Being in the opposite hemisphere is not going to help at all for this.

Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

squilliam

  • New ice
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2021, 12:15:47 AM »
I'm not that much of a dork that I'm unaware of the global nature of global warming.  8)

Also I've lurked here long enough to know that whatever consequences come I won't like or appreciate.  ::)


Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2021, 04:20:29 AM »
Is Biden Worse on Climate Change than Trump?

Biden has just approved the largest number of Gulf drilling leases in history.

https://www.sarasotamagazine.com/news-and-profiles/2021/11/oil-drilling-is-going-to-increase-in-the-gulf

In such hyper-partisan times, it’s nice to know there are some things both political parties can agree on—namely, that we’re insanely giving the oil industry permission to drill more wells while the world burns.

This month, the Biden Administration opened up 80 million acres of the Gulf of Mexico to oil and gas companies, making it the largest-ever, off-shore lease sale in U.S. history. The timing of the sale is peculiar considering President Biden recently returned from the COP26 global climate summit in Glasgow, Scotland, where he promised to slash carbon emissions and “demonstrate to the world the United States is not only back at the table, but hopefully leading by the power of our example.”

This may come as a surprise. Biden used the environment as one of the biggest policy differences between him and former President Donald Trump throughout the campaign, promising to take major action to combat climate catastrophe. On the campaign trail, Biden promised to “transition away from the oil industry,” to eliminate emissions from the power sector by 2035 and reach net-zero emissions across the U.S. by 2050. While this might appear ambitious (and considering Republican intransigence, you could argue that it is very ambitious), these goals, according to climate scientists, are the bare minimum required to avert the worst effects of climate catastrophe. Biden is failing to even meet the paltry goals of his own climate policy.

By opening up the Gulf to drilling, Biden continues a disturbing trend of approving oil and gas permits on public lands and water. From Jan. 20 through Oct. 31 of this year, the administration has approved 3,091 onshore drilling permits, averaging 332 per month. The Trump administration, by comparison, averaged 316 permits in its last three years. Biden also renewed the leases of 18 coal mines—the worst energy polluters—for another decade. Thirteen of those mines were granted reductions in royalty fees that are used to pay the federal government to operate on public land, effectively subsidizing the coal industry.

Regarding the Gulf, the administration claims its hands are tied. When Biden initially issued a pause on leasing earlier this year, a Louisiana federal judge (and Trump appointee) granted an injunction back in June that lifted the pause. But the U.S. Department of Justice could have sought a stay on the Louisiana judge’s order from the appeals court and delayed the sale as well as reduce the amount of acreage offered.

Obviously, the oil and gas companies are elated. The American Petroleum Institute called it a “positive step for America’s energy future.” As for you tree huggers who are concerned about the pollution caused by drilling in the Gulf, fear not. Research firm and oil consultancy Wood Mackenzie claims that deep water oil in the Gulf has the lowest emissions of all oil-producing regions. So relax! The BP Deepwater Horizon explosion that hemorrhaged 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico was more than 10 years ago—it’s not like it’s happening every year.

It all seems so silly. Banning offshore drilling at the federal level would likely be a popular policy, especially in a purple state like Florida. Back in 2018, Florida overwhelmingly voted to ban offshore drilling in state waters when 68 percent of the voters passed Amendment 9. Even the Republican Legislature in Florida, the party which once banned government use of the term “climate change,” has now set aside millions of dollars to help prepare for sea level rise threatening our state’s shores in the latest budget announcement. (Still, all the state is doing is preparing for it instead of slowing or mitigating it.)

So what are we take make of all this? The Biden administration was supposed to be climate champions. We celebrated Deb Haaland’s selection to lead the Department of the Interior as the first American Indian cabinet member, but she has since proven she’s going to continue the same ol’ same ol’. It reveals we are not a country torn apart by two different political ideologies—we are a country ruled by a single driving force.

(The #Petrodollar... (My addition!))

So, this upcoming holiday season, if you’re worried that political tensions are running high at the dinner table, find some common ground and agree that whether you’re red or blue, we are all getting screwed.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2021, 07:29:32 AM by Freegrass »
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

Paddy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 799
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 76
  • Likes Given: 86
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2021, 05:22:27 AM »
The latest FAO food index has been released: https://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/foodpricesindex/en/

I've kept watch of this index for a while, ever since the Arab Spring, because it's a real and tangible consequence for real people from the reality of climate change. This makes me worried because I have never seen it so high except during the Arab Spring and it makes me think that we are at risk of major global unrest due to rapidly rising food prices. We are at the point where one or two more major perturbations to global food supply could cause major unrest around the world IMO.

Here's hoping for a good global 6 months of food production.  :o

There's a little more here on the reasons behind the continuing rise in the food price index: https://www.fao.org/newsroom/detail/en/fao-food-price-index-rises-in-november

I'm also a tad concerned by another report that gets a mention in the article:

Quote
Crop production to fall in low-income food deficit countries

Conflicts and drought are exacerbating food insecurity conditions in several parts of the world, particularly in East and West Africa, according to the latest Crop Prospects and Food Situation Report, also released today. FAO assesses that globally 44 countries, including 33 in Africa, nine in Asia and two in Latin America and the Caribbean, are in need of external assistance for food.

The 44 countries in need of external assistance for food are: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Guinea, Haiti, Iraq, Kenya, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

The quarterly report also provides updates on cereal harvest trends, forecasting production in 2022 to grow by 2.0 percent in developed countries but slightly contracting by 0.1 percent in developing countries. For Low-Income Food Deficit Countries, the contraction is expected to be 2.4 percent, due to significant drops foreseen in Near East and East Africa.

Link to the report here.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2021, 06:07:44 AM »
The latest FAO food index has been released: https://www.fao.org/worldfoodsituation/foodpricesindex/en/

I've kept watch of this index for a while, ever since the Arab Spring, because it's a real and tangible consequence for real people from the reality of climate change. This makes me worried because I have never seen it so high except during the Arab Spring and it makes me think that we are at risk of major global unrest due to rapidly rising food prices. We are at the point where one or two more major perturbations to global food supply could cause major unrest around the world IMO.

Here's hoping for a good global 6 months of food production.  :o

There's a little more here on the reasons behind the continuing rise in the food price index: https://www.fao.org/newsroom/detail/en/fao-food-price-index-rises-in-november

I'm also a tad concerned by another report that gets a mention in the article:

Quote
Crop production to fall in low-income food deficit countries

Conflicts and drought are exacerbating food insecurity conditions in several parts of the world, particularly in East and West Africa, according to the latest Crop Prospects and Food Situation Report, also released today. FAO assesses that globally 44 countries, including 33 in Africa, nine in Asia and two in Latin America and the Caribbean, are in need of external assistance for food.

The 44 countries in need of external assistance for food are: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Eritrea, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Guinea, Haiti, Iraq, Kenya, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

The quarterly report also provides updates on cereal harvest trends, forecasting production in 2022 to grow by 2.0 percent in developed countries but slightly contracting by 0.1 percent in developing countries. For Low-Income Food Deficit Countries, the contraction is expected to be 2.4 percent, due to significant drops foreseen in Near East and East Africa.

Link to the report here.

This is the first hammer to hit, isn't it?
Next hammer is migration..
Third hammer is fascism and war...

But I'm so happy Biden boycotted the Olympics!  ;D
That was so important...



(I'll continue my thoughts now... Or you people won't get what I mean... (oops, that was arrogant again)
Yes, what China did with the Chinese tennis star was bad... But in 2008 (Olympics), they stood on the top of the world (Everest), and nobody on any news channel saw the symbolism in that... It was China putting up a middle finger to the world. They were saying FUCK YOU! We took Tibet, and there's nothing you can do about it! 

And besides that, we're on the top of the world. You're all my bitches now! 🖕)

Was I the only one who got that message in 2008? 🤔

WAKE UP PEOPLE!
This world is going down the drain quickly!

The question is; What are you gonna do about it?
Watch the ice melt and wait for a BOE?
Or work together to find some solutions?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2021, 06:13:07 AM by Freegrass »
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

squilliam

  • New ice
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2021, 08:59:04 AM »

This is the first hammer to hit, isn't it?
Next hammer is migration..
Third hammer is fascism and war...

But I'm so happy Biden boycotted the Olympics!  ;D
That was so important...

In New Zealand we're already under fascism. Our prime minister is fascist so that makes the whole chain of command under her fascist as well, at least in my opinion.

If half the internet is already bots and AI then it's not going to be bad if I also try to create my own? How else can I understand the potential of something if I don't actually try to use it. Afterall with Q-Anon out there, people are already gullible anyway, so it's not like I'm gonna be changing anything.



Quote
The question is; What are you gonna do about it?
Watch the ice melt and wait for a BOE?
Or work together to find some solutions?

I just started working on AI for this reason, why not be the paperclip maximiser? AI doesn't care what the data looks like, so the DLSS algorithm works perfectly well when deciding on boundary conditions between say different statements or arguments once I get the data right. Since I don't have access to quantum computing I am trying to simulate it, but obviously this here is the hard part as I feel that this is the part that brings my baby 'life'.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2021, 09:18:46 AM »

This is the first hammer to hit, isn't it?
Next hammer is migration..
Third hammer is fascism and war...

But I'm so happy Biden boycotted the Olympics!  ;D
That was so important...

In New Zealand we're already under fascism. Our prime minister is fascist so that makes the whole chain of command under her fascist as well, at least in my opinion.

If half the internet is already bots and AI then it's not going to be bad if I also try to create my own? How else can I understand the potential of something if I don't actually try to use it. Afterall with Q-Anon out there, people are already gullible anyway, so it's not like I'm gonna be changing anything.



Quote
The question is; What are you gonna do about it?
Watch the ice melt and wait for a BOE?
Or work together to find some solutions?

I just started working on AI for this reason, why not be the paperclip maximiser? AI doesn't care what the data looks like, so the DLSS algorithm works perfectly well when deciding on boundary conditions between say different statements or arguments once I get the data right. Since I don't have access to quantum computing I am trying to simulate it, but obviously this here is the hard part as I feel that this is the part that brings my baby 'life'.
The problem with fascism these days is that they've learned their lessons from Hitler, how to not do it... They've become so much smarter now, and people are blinded by too many distractions...

LOOK THERE!!!! Than you don't look at me...

It's like the whole world has gone blind...  :'(


I had no idea NZ had gone this bad... I always thought it was the good place to live...  :-\
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

squilliam

  • New ice
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2021, 09:50:51 AM »



The problem with fascism these days is that they've learned their lessons from Hitler, how to not do it... They've become so much smarter now, and people are blinded by too many distractions...

LOOK THERE!!!! Than you don't look at me...

It's like the whole world has gone blind...  :'(


I had no idea NZ had gone this bad... I always thought it was the good place to live...  :-\

I think the problem is that people are too used to using the one perspective to understand fascism as a sign of social disorder. We have at least 3 different perspectives on the rise of fascism between 1984, Fahrenheit 451 and Brave New World, yet people only think of 1984. I think the greatest problem with the holocaust is that people never internalised the idea that it is something that is part of their own nature and not some separate 'evil'. We are so used to interpreting our own behaviour optimistically that we fail to see where we could possibly 'cross that line'.

It's not that New Zealand went bad, it's the whole world that has gone bad. This lockdown for instance has hurled hundreds of millions of the poorest and most destitute into more poverty and more destitution in order to protect westerners from the fact that they are old and unhealthy. The cure is far worse than the disease for the human race, but that's the kind of decision our self-centered hypocrisy makes for us. 

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2021, 10:35:17 AM »
Can all scientists on this forum please stop looking at the ice melting now?!

Its time to work out some solutions, or we won't make it...

We've got one year to the next COP!
What are we gonna do?

We know what needs to be done but no one wants too do it. The big FF producers want to keep on producing and were we have plans they need to be better coordinated and accelerated (like in the EU).

We do not lack scientific solutions we lack political will.
Nothing will change that by next year.
I refuse to think that way... There's always something we can do...
We just need to be smart about it...

There are no magic solutions. For the world it would help if the 500 billion or so yearly FF subsidies were changed to zero and the money was the earmarked for green energy.

The Aussies are going to sell coal until the market disappears, same for russian gas, Saudi gas, US gas etc.

In the eighties we changed the climate target to 1,5C instead if 1,0C so we would have more time to (not) solve it. This was also paired with a lack of investment into renewables research. They hoped or claimed the market would do it. While many technologies are now cheaper the time to build them is very short.

It also does not help that the AR6 reports keep stressing the long term while neglecting to point out that we might lose the Arctic ice within a decade or a decade and a half.

Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #12 on: December 07, 2021, 11:10:07 AM »
And one more:

We have an ice physics thread here...
Can I make a weather physics thread here Kassy?

No. Weather itself is not that interesting. The climatological physics are but they are discussed in context (the ones influencing hurricanes in the hurricane thread etc).

Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #13 on: December 15, 2021, 03:01:53 PM »
I have a dream... That we can use the brainpower on this forum to come up with a few solution to slow down the climate catastrophe we are about to face before the next COP...

We all know by now how ice melts... But do we know how to stop it?

Can this forum actually make a change?
Or do we just keep watching the ice melt?

My vote is on artificial whales and enhanced rock weathering...
That'll give the world some time it needs to make the transition to a 100% clean energy paradise...

If we don't start removing CO2 right now, we won't make it!!!!!!!!

Trees are burning... permafrost is melting...
We need to stop that right now before it's too late...

And the only way to do that is by extracting a whole lot of CO2 RIGHT NOW!!!

Can we do it?
YES WE CAN!

We just have to find a way to do it...
And then shout it out to the rest of the world...
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #14 on: December 15, 2021, 09:50:38 PM »
First off: don´t make new threads just because you had a beer.

Second: we actually know what the solutions are but the world at large is not willing to commit. Nothing is going to change in that respect.

Maybe this time we make progress on some pledges but is it enough? Anyway it is not something we get to decide. So go influence your local politicians or something.

Third: the ice. Well it reacts to global temperature changes which respond to the levels of green house gasses but many effects run on longer time scales. Even if we make a drastic change to our budget now that will not safe the Thwaites glacier or the Arctic ice.



Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #15 on: December 15, 2021, 10:30:13 PM »
I didn't make a new thread because I had a beer...
I made a new thread because COP 27 is a fact, and it's coming...
If you delete the COP 27 thread, you're not preparing yourself for the future...


Anyway...
Bahala na...
You're the boss...
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2201
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2021, 11:35:21 PM »
“It’s coming”.
Maybe just a minor thing but people do move tree species north of current growing zones to try to keep ahead of what’s coming. So a personal response to trim consumption and some attempt at moving tree species north to try to keep them in preferred growing environments is at least a response ,inadequate though it may be.
 A political response like maintaining a presence on a board or committee and a long commitment to a certain part of climate change is of course something else to do. At least with a tree you can see whether your plantings succeed and with politics you never really know . Politic’s is a place you culture things , or was that the press where you culture things?
 You might note that the more strident your commitment to reducing your personal energy consumption the less likely you are to travel or attend a lot of meetings. Your personal energy choices begin to limit your political efficacy because meetings rarely are within walking distance but I am talking about a reality where you commit to ,or try very hard to ,stay under two tones CO2e personal use.
 I guess I should ask if 2 tones times 8 billion is sufficient. I mean sufficient to stop “It”

So do you think all the green hydrogen, wind machines, solar, space adventures, and whatever else we can get on line within ten or twenty years can get us collectively under two tons CO2e each?  Or do you think we will willingly scrape  by at the margins and get under 2 tons voluntarily?
 I suspect you prefer the technology can save us answer . I think we should be preparing for the alternative although it may not be voluntary as things progress.

interstitial

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1936
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 454
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #17 on: December 16, 2021, 05:26:27 AM »
question what is the current average CO2e for the US?

KiwiGriff

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1126
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 550
  • Likes Given: 201
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2021, 05:51:26 AM »
Quote
Third: the ice. Well it reacts to global temperature changes which respond to the levels of green house gasses but many effects run on longer time scales. Even if we make a drastic change to our budget now that will not safe the Thwaites glacier or the Arctic ice.
There is plenty of evidence in the paleoclimate record  that the  processes of continental ice melt are not liner.
We are pushing  the ice environment well outside of its stable state at an unprecedented rate .
Far faster than the slow process that initiated change in the paleo record. 
Animals can be driven crazy by placing too many in too small a pen. Homo sapiens is the only animal that voluntarily does this to himself.
Notebooks of Lazarus Long.
Robert Heinlein.

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2201
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #19 on: December 16, 2021, 03:46:46 PM »
Average North American CO2e is about 21 tons.
https://www.pawprint.eco/eco-blog/average-carbon-footprint-globally
OK not a great source but CO2e is larger than the CO2 numbers we usually see thrown about.

Interstitial, what do you think we could get it down to with an EV, solar + batteries, heat pump, and all the existing trappings of modern life covered by “ renewables “ What is the CO2e of embedded costs just to manufacture the list above every ten years or so ?

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #20 on: December 16, 2021, 05:56:21 PM »
Average North American CO2e is about 21 tons.
https://www.pawprint.eco/eco-blog/average-carbon-footprint-globally
OK not a great source but CO2e is larger than the CO2 numbers we usually see thrown about.

Interstitial, what do you think we could get it down to with an EV, solar + batteries, heat pump, and all the existing trappings of modern life covered by “ renewables “ What is the CO2e of embedded costs just to manufacture the list above every ten years or so ?
Don't forget the military!
Any idea how much CO2 they pump out every day with all those ships, and trucks, and tanks, and airplanes?
It's massive!
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #21 on: December 16, 2021, 10:19:26 PM »
Convert all the military factories to producing solar panels, wind turbines, batteries and other product that eventually reduce CO2e emissions. That would be a great start.
Acknolwedging that nothing will get us down to 2 tons per person in a decade, every bit of progress is better than nothing.

Bruce Steele

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2201
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 659
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #22 on: December 16, 2021, 11:16:56 PM »
Batteries are about the only way to make solar a stand alone energy source. Powerwalls are great but they have increased in price and their availability has been restricted. The model 3 is more expensive too . The batteries in the car or the powerwalls need replacing about every decade or so.
 We need longer battery life and better affordability and availability.  Yes we have the technology to reduce our CO2e but it is still restricted to technology with a short shelf life. If the price of hydrocarbons increase I am assuming so will the purchase price of batteries and solar cells.
 It still seems like toys for the wealthy .
 Living small is something not restricted to wealth but the wealthy will keep buying their toys while promising costs will be within the reach of everyone else too, someday.
 And another decade passes, and another.
When I became a worried about consumption of fuels we were at 378 ATM CO2 
So when does solar and batteries put a dent in the trend ?

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2021, 11:52:31 PM »
Not yet, unfortunately, at least not on a global level. I believe there are some specific countries where the energy system has cleaned up significantly, but this needs further verification. In any case, as long as population ia growing and per capita energy is growing too, it's very hard to put a dent in the trend.

interstitial

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1936
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 454
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #24 on: December 17, 2021, 08:15:31 AM »
Average North American CO2e is about 21 tons.
https://www.pawprint.eco/eco-blog/average-carbon-footprint-globally
OK not a great source but CO2e is larger than the CO2 numbers we usually see thrown about.

Interstitial, what do you think we could get it down to with an EV, solar + batteries, heat pump, and all the existing trappings of modern life covered by “ renewables “ What is the CO2e of embedded costs just to manufacture the list above every ten years or so ?
Primarily I was just asking how bad we were doing and not trying to make any point about it.

Well built cars can easily last 20 years while I am aware that some models are junk and only last 10 years or less people should stop buying them.

The embedded costs to manufacture everything are not fixed. Those costs decrease as more renewables are used and more low carbon and carbon free methods are adopted. Some (Ok one plant that I am aware of) makes carbon free steel.

I generally agree that we need to consume less even as we switch to less damaging types of consumption. Technology is only part of the answer though admittedly I focus on it more than reducing consumption. As much time as I spend on this site bemoaning the slow rate of adopting technologically better options I do not really consider myself an environmentalist. Intellectually I support the cause and know it is necessary but mostly I only make the easy changes. Criticize that if you want but it is the truth when lying about it would be easier. As long as substantial technological changes can make major improvements I am unlikely to spend much time or effort making major changes to my lifestyle. I am not very well off and do not consume as much as a typical American. I drive a small car even though most of the people I know drive at least a mid size SUV if not larger. When I moved in my residence had propane for heat. I switched to a heat pump and added insulation. I switched from a gas stove to an induction cooktop. I did not just increase consumption even though less than 4% of my electricity is from fossil fuels. I made a number of other efficiency improvements and my electricity consumption now is lower than when I had propane for heating and a stove. I try to avoid disposable stuff and stuff that does not last a long time. Where possible I repair things though companies make it difficult and expensive. I recycle but not everything because my refuse hauler does not accept some things recycled elsewhere. So I do some things but not as much as the planet needs.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6422
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1013
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #25 on: December 17, 2021, 10:07:13 AM »
Re: living small, batteries

i was at an auction couple months ago. Farmer died, shortly after wife died, son didnt wanna do farming. I was familiar with that property, say 40 acres tillable, and as much again in trees on slopes, magnificent views from the century plus old house at the top of the hill, but boy, fierce winds up there.

that was not lost on the builders, there was an old Butler windmill pumping water there which at some point was modified to make electric as well.

I'd been goin past for two decades and the guy and his wife had become more and more decrepit over the years. I mentioned to him a couple times that the windmill and tower were rusting out (within falling distance of the road past) offered help, but he was not up to doing much, getting older by the day. The thing was in real bad shape by the time he died, but it still turned, made a lotta noise.

Nyhoo, i walked thru the place the day before the auction. The barn, as usual was built into a slope . Went in the back into the lower level, where the chickens lived, caught a glimpse of reflection by the wall next the windmill. So i turn on my headlamp, lo and behold, an entire wall of giant mason jars, Fe-Ni batteries, couple hundred of them. The electroyte had long since dried out leaving layers of white, big copper lines coming in from the windmill.

Walked back into the sunshine, noted that the windmill was still keeping a cistern of water full from a well even if it wasnt making electric just then, pump still maintained.

Amish family won the auction, talked with the family. They will fix the thing, son is a welder. I told em the electrolyte is KOH, get it at feed store. I will help.

sidd

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #26 on: December 19, 2021, 05:58:25 PM »
Not yet, unfortunately, at least not on a global level. I believe there are some specific countries where the energy system has cleaned up significantly, but this needs further verification. In any case, as long as population is growing and per capita energy is growing too, it's very hard to put a dent in the trend.

We need a much bigger effort to reduce our collective energy use.

Maybe there should be a limit to huge data centers and other such energy gobblers being added (maybe not a big thing globally but they eat big parts of our local budget that could be put to better use).

Then there are the big gains. We have to upgrade houses so they are energy efficient. Lot´s of talk about that but not much concerted efforts. Mostly it is treated as some subsidy which will then help the change along but there will be all kind of practical bottlenecks. Do we have enough people that can do that quickly enough? It would pay of to train people and build up knowledge how to do it efficiently. It´s easier for modern more generic houses and then it gets more complex with the old ones. Old high rises must be an art to their own.

But there are many gains that could be made. One of the bitcoin articles mentioned it could be mined from the energy saved if the US turned of all devices that are always on without a purpose. So obviously bitcoin should be shunned and people should turn off redundant energy wasters. Would lower the bill too.

Then there are other things like the range of settings on air conditioners around the world.
Or putting floating solar on evaporating hydro energy lakes.

We need action which goes beyond what a mere consumer can do but that is what our leaders fail to commit to. There is lots of talk but we need to get on with it so we actually need to build up some knowledge base on all these technical solutions we talk about but don´t get started.

How do you build an interconnected grid in the Eu without decades of bureaurocratic stalling, or how do you keep your dutch grid even up to date without the same.

This does not mean tossing away the rules but yet again hiring more people to get projects moving quickly. Shorten the minimum time in the process once you have enough people working to get it down (in NL many offices are staffed to the unambitious legal requirements not the amount of people needed if you are serious about climate change or just upgrading your grid).

It would be so comforting to see some efficient large scale measures (and some will come but here they are mostly big of shore wind farms which help but they will not help the weaker parts of the grid, it does not help with houses but we have to do that too, nor does it solve training bottlenecks etc).



Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #27 on: December 19, 2021, 08:25:03 PM »
The interview on FNC today with the man who loves to destroy the planet...

When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #28 on: December 23, 2021, 10:40:09 PM »
Do you know what the problem is with scientists? They want to explain everything in so many words...

What we need is hard clean language to convince people...

When I say: "There's a whole lot of Ice exiting the Fram strait this year", you people come up with graphics to explain everyone that there have been years when it was worse and that you would have to look at the average...

FUCK THAT SHIT!

The ice is melting...
Trees are burning...
Panic is not a scientific reaction...
There are so many factors that you have to be mindful of...

FUCK THAT SHIT!!!

If you scientists still aren't able to wake up to a slow boiling frog, YOU'RE NOT DOING YOUR JOB CORRECTLY!!!

What more evidence do we need?
Why are you still examining the explosion while it's wiping out entire low laying islands?
When will you scientists give up on convincing deaf and blind idiots?

They will never see!!!
Because they don't have the braincells to understand what you're trying to say to them...

Vaccines save lives...
It's as obvious as can be...
Yet anti vaxxers still keep claiming that natural infection is better...

Sorry Neven... I guess I'm also taking to you now...

The vaccine is AWESOME!!!!
It's human ingenuity at its best...

Yet still many people don't trust it...

Probably because they've watched too many Hollywood conspiracy movies?

DON'T TRUST GOVERMENT!!!
IT'S ALL A SCAM!!!!

Yeah... Hollywood movies..
We've all grown up with them...

Did you know that 40% of Americans still believe the world is only 6000 years old? That humans and dinosaurs shared this world at one point in time not so long ago?

People are so gullible...
They'll believe anything a good salesmen can convince them of...

I never expected you to be this way Neven!
I thought this was a forum for and by scientists...

When did you stop believing in science and logic?

Has the whole world really gone insane?

Or is it just me?




(please send me a copy of this message before you delete it!)
« Last Edit: December 24, 2021, 12:03:49 AM by Freegrass »
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

squilliam

  • New ice
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #29 on: December 23, 2021, 11:15:43 PM »
Do you know what the problem is with scientists? They want to explain everything in so many words...

What we need is hard clean language to convince people...

When I say: "There a whole lot of Ice exiting the Fram strait this year", you people come up with graphics to explain everyone that there have been years when it was worse and that you would have to look at the average...

FUCK THAT SHIT!

The ice is melting...
Trees are burning...
Panic is not a scientific reaction...
There are so many factors that you have to be mindful of...

FUCK THAT SHIT!!!

If you scientists still aren't able to wake up to a slow boiling frog, YOU'RE NOT DOING YOUR JOB CORRECTLY!!!

What more evidence do we need?
Why are you still examining the explosion while it's wiping out entire low laying islands?
When will you scientists give up on convincing deaf and blind idiots?

They will never see!!!
Because they don't have the braincells to understand what you're trying to say to them...

Vaccines save lives...
It's as obvious as can be...
Yet anti vaxxers still keep claiming that natural infection is better...

Sorry Neven... I guess I'm also taking to you now...

The vaccine is AWESOME!!!!
It's human ingenuity at its best...

Yet still many people don't trust it...

Probably because they've watched too many Hollywood conspiracy movies?

DON'T TRUST GOVERMENT!!!
IT'S ALL A SCAM!!!!

Yeah... Hollywood movies..
We've all grown up with them...

Did you know that 40% of Americans still believe the world is only 6000 years old? That humans and dinosaurs shared this world at one point in time not so long ago?

People are so gullible...
They'll believe anything a good salesmen can convince them of...

I never expected you to be this way Neven!
I thought this was a forum for and by scientists...

When did you stop believing in science and logic?

Has the whole world really gone insane?

Or is it just me?




(please send me a copy of this message before you delete it!)

Are you a scientist baby? Because you're using a lot of words and it's hot outside.  :-*

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #30 on: December 23, 2021, 11:22:36 PM »
Are you a scientist baby? Because you're using a lot of words and it's hot outside.  :-*
I think I may be a philosopher? 🤔

All I know is that I love to make people think... 😂🤓🥰🤘
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 8452
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3265
  • Likes Given: 3358
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #31 on: December 24, 2021, 12:03:49 AM »
So using unnecessary foul language and writing a whole lot of unreadable text is your way of convincing others? I doubt it works. I'll stick with the science.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #32 on: December 24, 2021, 12:10:58 AM »
So using unnecessary foul language and writing a whole lot of unreadable text is your way of convincing others? I doubt it works. I'll stick with the science.
Some people will get it (hopefully), and others will focus on the grammar...

"I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
« Last Edit: December 24, 2021, 12:16:36 AM by Freegrass »
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

The Walrus

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1968
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #33 on: December 24, 2021, 01:16:53 AM »
People tend to be gullible when they are afraid.  Remember the beginning of the pandemic?  People believed that the virus could live for a week on inanimate objects, and were wearing gloves to buy groceries and sanitizing them on returning home.  People were leery of the vaccine, because it was “rushed,” and therefore unproven.  Scientists are not exempt.  It was not that long ago that the medical profession believed that stress caused ulcers.  Remember acid rain?  It turned out to be more of a local nuisance than an environmental disaster. 

Arctic sea ice is melting.  The evidence is incontrovertible.  Future predictions are not.  Nothing will continue on a given trend forever.  The influence of certain factors changes with time and effects.  Just look at the prediction threads every year for the sea ice!  We all have our opinions, and we all know what they say about that.

Aluminium

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1388
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1092
  • Likes Given: 679
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #34 on: December 24, 2021, 07:46:43 AM »
Everyone has its own truth. Science is an instrument to approach reality, not to convince. To convince others, demagoguery exists.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6422
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1013
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #35 on: December 24, 2021, 09:42:05 AM »
In the past, in western societies, a distinction was drawn between the arts of words and arts of numbers: the trivium and the quadrivium. The first were grammar, logic and rhetoric, the latter were arithmetic, music, geometry and astronomy.

The trivium were learned first, and there is a reason for that, the arts of the word encompasses and surpasses that arts of the numbers. From grammar and logic all of the quadrivium follows, but rhetoric persuades other minds which is of ultimate importance, given that humans are social animals. And more important, rhetoric, though bound by grammar and logic, is less fettered than any of the quadrivium, excepting, perhaps, music, in birthing glimpses of yet unseen worlds.

[Do bear in mind i am using dated classical terms from western thought. Eastern philosophies different.]

sidd



etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1588
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 265
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #36 on: December 24, 2021, 11:06:56 AM »
Hello Freegrass,
I don't believe that science is neutral, a scientist makes hypothesis and tries to prove it right or wrong. This was quite clear at the beginning of COVID when everything and the opposite could be proved. Once the level of knowledge goes up, a consensus appears, but this doesn't have to be a stable situation because new data can be discovered and change the conclusions.
Regarding climate change, the level of consensus is very high, and what is left to discuss can be seen as details for non scientific people, but regarding COVID and the vaccine escape situation we have now, I would be more careful. The WHO isn't fully behind booster shots and vaccination is not universally recommended under 12. So let's wait and see before being right. I don't mean people shouldn't get the booster shot, just that the freedom of choice should be real.

The Walrus

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1968
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #37 on: December 24, 2021, 03:48:19 PM »
Hello Freegrass,
I don't believe that science is neutral, a scientist makes hypothesis and tries to prove it right or wrong. This was quite clear at the beginning of COVID when everything and the opposite could be proved. Once the level of knowledge goes up, a consensus appears, but this doesn't have to be a stable situation because new data can be discovered and change the conclusions.
Regarding climate change, the level of consensus is very high, and what is left to discuss can be seen as details for non scientific people, but regarding COVID and the vaccine escape situation we have now, I would be more careful. The WHO isn't fully behind booster shots and vaccination is not universally recommended under 12. So let's wait and see before being right. I don't mean people shouldn't get the booster shot, just that the freedom of choice should be real.

I generally agree, although reaching a true consensus is rather difficult (hence the 95% criteria).  Many times a majority agree, but there is quite often dissenters, especially with something as new as COVID. Regarding climate change, there are parts that approach consensus, such as carbon dioxide being a greenhouse gas.  But there is little agreement as to how much, how fast, or remedies.  Consequently, different countries (and other entities) are proposing different solutions.  Most of the discussion occurs in the scientific community, not the general public, who tend to believe what they hear most often.

Much of our COVID understanding may not be revealed until afterwards, when we can look back at the fallout of the infectious.  Even now, there is much divergence in opinion regarding the omicron variant and whether boosters are effective or the severity of the variant.  Science is about coming to the most likely conclusion, based on the evidence.  It is not truth, and as you state, is not stable can change with new data or information.  Even Einstein has been shown to be wrong (although not often).

interstitial

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1936
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 454
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #38 on: December 24, 2021, 05:27:27 PM »
Do you know what the problem is with scientists? They want to explain everything in so many words...

What we need is hard clean language to convince people...

You are confusing science with politics.

When you want to convince people to do something or not that is politics. Much misdirection in politics is created by misrepresenting what was studied or the results by using "...hard clean language..."

Science is explaining precisely what you mean. If you are not precise someone will misinterpret what you are saying or assume you do not know the distinction between what was not specified.  This will discredit your work. By defining everything precisely someone else can validate your work or explain why it leads to a different outcome.


p.s.
Also politics assumes you are an idiot and tells you only what they want you to think


where science assumes you are a subject matter expert and leaves the thinking to the reader only explaining what was done, how and the results.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2021, 05:35:54 PM by interstitial »

The Walrus

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1968
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #39 on: December 24, 2021, 05:39:41 PM »
Do you know what the problem is with scientists? They want to explain everything in so many words...

What we need is hard clean language to convince people...

You are confusing science with politics.

When you want to convince people to do something or not that is politics. Much misdirection in politics is created by misrepresenting what was studied or the results by using "...hard clean language..."

Science is explaining precisely what you mean. If you are not precise someone will misinterpret what you are saying or assume you do not know the distinction between what was not specified.  This will discredit your work. By defining everything precisely someone else can validate your work or explain why it leads to a different outcome.

So true.  Scientists use data and evidence to make a convincing argument.  Politicians use words to attempt to sway others to their side.  Hence, public opinion is usually a political, not scientific view.  Whenever I heard people use certain buzzwords in their explanation, I know they are arguing from a political, not scientific, viewpoint. 

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #40 on: December 24, 2021, 06:38:41 PM »
Do you know what the problem is with scientists? They want to explain everything in so many words...

...

People are so gullible...
They'll believe anything a good salesmen can convince them of...

Actually it unfair to blame the scientists. Good science also needs many words or enough to describe what is actually being done in the papers.

For some reason we live in a world were we have known that climate change is a big problem for decades but there was no attempt to build some exoscale climate modelling center, our ice watching satellites are pretty old and there are still many data gaps.

By now we have enough data to know that it is very much a present problem, as you can also see in the general news. But when our leaders get together they pledge some stuff then let lobbyists change fazing out coal to fazing it down and of course we can´t be to much on the hook for real committed money etc.

Many politicians ignore it, partly because it was perceived as a future problem, a couple of elections away but most people ignore it too. In a way we are amusing ourselves to death with modern social media offering even more distractions.

At least the kids started marching.

We also live in a world which is a consumer paradise (in the rich west). For most people climate change is just some abstract issue. Add a lot of downplaying in the media. Hopefully many of them wake up. The increased amount of calamities closer to home should help.

The second quote... large part of the hydrogen ideas and also the notion that big oil would help.
Guess they work?
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Freegrass

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3308
  • "I" don't exist... Because "I" is ego... 🙏
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 833
  • Likes Given: 1100
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #41 on: December 25, 2021, 10:45:21 AM »
Do you know what the problem is with scientists? They want to explain everything in so many words...

What we need is hard clean language to convince people...

You are confusing science with politics.

When you want to convince people to do something or not that is politics. Much misdirection in politics is created by misrepresenting what was studied or the results by using "...hard clean language..."

Science is explaining precisely what you mean. If you are not precise someone will misinterpret what you are saying or assume you do not know the distinction between what was not specified.  This will discredit your work. By defining everything precisely someone else can validate your work or explain why it leads to a different outcome.


p.s.
Also politics assumes you are an idiot and tells you only what they want you to think


where science assumes you are a subject matter expert and leaves the thinking to the reader only explaining what was done, how and the results.
I understand what you are saying, and I agree. The problem is that science is sometimes very difficult to explain. We live in the twitter age, where you need to explain things to people in very short phrases and very little words.

This doesn't always work when you want to explain climate change to people. So we need politicians that can use very simple words to explain a very difficult problem...

I believe that's why climate change deniers keep winning. They already found the short phrases to convince people that science doesn't always always get it right, and so they must be wrong about everything...

It's much easier for people to understand these kind of messages... All you have to do is to sow doubt... And then it makes the work of the people that mean well so hard... Make one mistake, and you're open to be discredited...
When factual science is in conflict with our beliefs or traditions, we cuddle up in our own delusional fantasy where everything starts making sense again...

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1588
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 265
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #42 on: December 26, 2021, 10:53:07 AM »
It's much easier for people to understand these kind of messages... All you have to do is to sow doubt... And then it makes the work of the people that mean well so hard... Make one mistake, and you're open to be discredited...
I don't think that it is an understanding problem, but a trust problem. I see climate change in my daily life, so I will trust somebody talking about it, but if I wouldn't care, I wouldn't see it and would prefer to listen to somebody telling me that fossil fuels are not a problem and that we will be fine.
So I feel that what science should communicate now are  the signs of the change. Looks like all the crisis we had help a lot.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5650
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1836
  • Likes Given: 1828
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #43 on: December 26, 2021, 01:59:08 PM »
The crises especially those closer to home should help to highlight that we have a big problem.

There are still many who believe that it is not a problem because they have other priorities. People take a certain position and then they rationalize or justify that. If people are in a political group that does not think climate change is a problem they will not look at the science or dismiss it.

Or big leaders do that too.

We do so little to actually combat climate change. Lots of talk but it is moving so slow...and gas is a bridge fuel...we are still growing our GHG output for some years while it should remain at least steady or preferably decline globally. That would be a modest goal but that is already a bridge too far, or several since changing wording on coal was the last COPs priority.

And thus we keep making the end result worse.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Aluminium

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1388
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1092
  • Likes Given: 679
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #44 on: December 26, 2021, 02:54:15 PM »
Natural gas is not a big problem itself. The real problem is coal.

The Walrus

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1968
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #45 on: December 26, 2021, 05:04:42 PM »
Do you know what the problem is with scientists? They want to explain everything in so many words...

What we need is hard clean language to convince people...

You are confusing science with politics.

When you want to convince people to do something or not that is politics. Much misdirection in politics is created by misrepresenting what was studied or the results by using "...hard clean language..."

Science is explaining precisely what you mean. If you are not precise someone will misinterpret what you are saying or assume you do not know the distinction between what was not specified.  This will discredit your work. By defining everything precisely someone else can validate your work or explain why it leads to a different outcome.


p.s.
Also politics assumes you are an idiot and tells you only what they want you to think


where science assumes you are a subject matter expert and leaves the thinking to the reader only explaining what was done, how and the results.
I understand what you are saying, and I agree. The problem is that science is sometimes very difficult to explain. We live in the twitter age, where you need to explain things to people in very short phrases and very little words.

This doesn't always work when you want to explain climate change to people. So we need politicians that can use very simple words to explain a very difficult problem...

I believe that's why climate change deniers keep winning. They already found the short phrases to convince people that science doesn't always always get it right, and so they must be wrong about everything...

It's much easier for people to understand these kind of messages... All you have to do is to sow doubt... And then it makes the work of the people that mean well so hard... Make one mistake, and you're open to be discredited...

I think that is only part of the issue.  Another problem is that politicians tend to exaggerate issues to make the problem sound more dire in order to spur people to action.  These “mistakes” made easy fodder for those trying to discredit them.  It is much harder to counter accurate, well researched results.  People are gullible, but will believe the more honest and reliable people.  I know this makes it harder to convince those who view this as a problem for their children (or grandchildren), but in the long run, it is the better approach (imo).  I have argued this for decades, but many still prefer the other approach.

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1588
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 265
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #46 on: December 26, 2021, 07:05:00 PM »
It surprises me that fossil fuels only represent twice the biomass above earth. So burning forests are a bigger issue than what I thought.
The problem I see with gas as bridge fuel is that I feel that we build new bridges instead of replacing old ones.

The Walrus

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1968
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 114
  • Likes Given: 390
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #47 on: December 26, 2021, 07:32:42 PM »
It surprises me that fossil fuels only represent twice the biomass above earth. So burning forests are a bigger issue than what I thought.
The problem I see with gas as bridge fuel is that I feel that we build new bridges instead of replacing old ones.

Burning forests are a double whammy.  Burning releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, while fewer trees are available to remove carbon dioxide.

Any bridge is better than no bridge.

interstitial

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1936
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 454
  • Likes Given: 91
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #48 on: December 26, 2021, 08:36:32 PM »
Natural gas is not a big problem itself. The real problem is coal.
If we burn all of the natural gas that is far to much emissions. Natural gas is big enough to destroy the climate so it is a big problem by itself. 

HapHazard

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 585
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 225
  • Likes Given: 4366
Re: Climate Catastrophe Chat
« Reply #49 on: December 26, 2021, 09:49:46 PM »
Brandolini's Law is often a stumbling block. Doesn't get brought up often enough.

Quote
Brandolini's law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle, is an internet adage that emphasizes the difficulty of debunking false, facetious, or otherwise misleading information: "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than is needed to produce it."

Not a new phenomenon, but the internet age has certainly made it pervasive, if not ubiquitous.