Arctic Sea Ice : Forum

AGW in general => Consequences => Topic started by: Hefaistos on July 06, 2017, 10:23:00 PM

Title: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Hefaistos on July 06, 2017, 10:23:00 PM
Article about very interesting redistribution of humidity due to global warming. From dry to wet: Rainfall might abruptly increase in Africa’s Sahel . It's a region that historically has been more humid, and 'green' than todays very arid/desert.

"Climate change could turn one of Africa's driest regions into a very wet one by suddenly switching on a Monsoon circulation. For the first time, scientists find evidence in computer simulations for a possible abrupt change to heavy seasonal rainfall in the Sahel, a region that so far has been characterized by extreme dryness. They detect a self-amplifying mechanism which might kick-in beyond 1.5-2 degrees Celsius of global warming."

https://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/press-releases/from-dry-to-wet-rainfall-might-abruptly-increase-in-africa2019s-sahel (https://www.pik-potsdam.de/news/press-releases/from-dry-to-wet-rainfall-might-abruptly-increase-in-africa2019s-sahel)

Research article, paywalled:
http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/8/495/2017/ (http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/8/495/2017/)
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on June 15, 2019, 08:11:00 PM
Well, Siberia will get more livable:
https://grist.org/article/forget-colonizing-mars-we-can-all-move-to-russia-when-the-world-heats-up/
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: kassy on June 19, 2019, 02:40:22 PM
Maybe you wanted to put that in the less liveable thread?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: b_lumenkraft on June 19, 2019, 02:50:56 PM
OMG!

Thanks, Kassy!

Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Archimid on June 19, 2019, 03:00:16 PM
Well, Siberia will get more livable:
https://grist.org/article/forget-colonizing-mars-we-can-all-move-to-russia-when-the-world-heats-up/

Only while the Arctic holds and after the NH hemisphere stabilizes after an Arctic collapse ( decades?). In the time in between collapse and climate stabilization Siberia will be uninhabitable.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Hefaistos on July 11, 2019, 12:57:55 PM

Global heating: London to have climate similar to Barcelona by 2050
"London will have a similar climate in three decades’ time to that of Barcelona today, according to research – but if that seems enticing, a warning: the change could be accompanied by severe drought."
Severe drought in London?!

OTOH, more places will become less livable: Nearly 80% of cities to undergo dramatic and potentially disastrous changes, study finds. "Among the most concerning findings is that the residents of about a fifth of cities globally – including Jakarta, Singapore, Yangon and Kuala Lumpur – will experience conditions currently not seen in any major cities in the world."

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/10/global-heating-london-similar-climate-barcelona-2050
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: TerryM on July 15, 2019, 07:58:25 AM
I believe the Waterloo Region in Ontario's "livability" has increased over my lifetime.


Improvements:
The river no longer freezes over each year so the Spring Floods, once the fear of everyone up and down the river no longer occur.
The river no longer suffers from pollution and won an international competition for the remediation.
The roadways suffer far less from flooding and frost heaves.
Universities have replaced factories and mills as the major regional employers.
Education has improved;
Healthcare has improved in quality and availability since it was nationalized.
Spring, Summer and Fall have extended. Winters are shorter and warmer.
The available social safety-nets have improved.
Median income & wealth have improved.


Neutral:
Skating has moved indoors.
Swimming is replacing skiing and snowshoeing.
Violent crime is still very much a rarity.
Infrastructure has kept up - Mills became townhouses or restaurants. Factories were bulldozed and replaced with medium rise apartments.
The cops are and were friendly & helpful.


Worse:
Tornados have moved northward and are now seen as threatening.
AC is required in the summer.
Watering lawns in "droughts" is sometimes needed.
Fewer songbirds.
Fewer butterflies, insects.

In all this region has so far weathered global warming well.
I'd say that life here presently is better than it was before the weather began changing.
Terry
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on July 15, 2019, 09:17:11 AM

Global heating: London to have climate similar to Barcelona by 2050
"London will have a similar climate in three decades’ time to that of Barcelona today, according to research – but if that seems enticing, a warning: the change could be accompanied by severe drought."
Severe drought in London?!


This research is complete BS. They took the maximum summer temperatures and compared those to current ones hence London to become Barcelona. They did not compare the entire climate, average temps. etc.

Besides, our climate models falsely model, and cannot replicate even the Green Sahara (cca 10k-k yr ago) or the Holocene Optimum (7k yr ago). So I have very serious doubts about the models which do not seem to get changes in atmospheric circulation right. Anyway, FWIW the European Environmental Agency has projections for 2071-2100. They see +3-4C for London with RCP8.5 by 2071-2100. Pretty far from Barcelona.

Anyway: more on topic

Central Europe has seen about 1,5-2 C temp rises since the 1950-80 period, with longer (cca 2 weeks) spring, a much warmer November, less extreme winter lows. Somuchso, that in my country figs are now not exotic anymore (they used to be), and people started to grow kiwi and oriental persimmon (I also have figs and they grow pretty well). There has been a slight increase in rains since the 80s. Summers have warmed the most, making the country more Mediterranean
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: RikW on July 16, 2019, 12:26:34 PM
It's good to see that in the Netherland we have a relative low temperature change in those scenario's;

At least we drown in 'normal' conditions...
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: DrTskoul on July 16, 2019, 12:48:35 PM
It's good to see that in the Netherland we have a relative low temperature change in those scenario's;

At least we drown in 'normal' conditions...

Better than boil.... although A/C s will become more prevalent up north that they used to be
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on July 24, 2019, 06:23:09 PM
Lake Erie may be next wine belt:
https://buffalonews.com/2019/07/22/could-lake-eries-grape-belt-be-the-next-napa-valley/
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: TerryM on July 24, 2019, 06:54:06 PM
Lake Erie may be next wine belt:
https://buffalonews.com/2019/07/22/could-lake-eries-grape-belt-be-the-next-napa-valley/ (https://buffalonews.com/2019/07/22/could-lake-eries-grape-belt-be-the-next-napa-valley/)
Just north of Lake Erie you'll find vineyards to either side of the road.
And the palm trees at Port Dover provide much needed shade.
Terry
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on September 02, 2019, 06:41:51 PM
Climate change might benefit Canada — but not enough to outweigh costs: expert
https://globalnews.ca/news/5836813/climate-change-cost-to-canada/
Quote
A report earlier this summer by Moody’s Analytics made headlines for its assessment of a report by the UN’s Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in which the analytics firm made the case that while many countries will suffer a heavy cost from climate change, Canada could see benefits.

Those would most likely come in the form of more arable land, a longer growing season, and the potential to produce more crops.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: sidd on September 04, 2019, 08:09:27 AM
Mmmm ... one effect i did not expect, on the upside: coastal dunes actually greening and stabilizing

doi: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2019.103026

"Initial large areas of bare mobile sand within the main dune field are broken into isolated basins separated by vegetation. These basins then gradually reduce in size as vegetation colonises the margins, creating a predominantly stable dune landscape. "

"Worldwide, continental wind speeds have decreased by 5–15% during the last 30 years, and are generally expected to continue decreasing during the 21st-century "

"Our analysis points to a clear ‘greening’ of coastal dunes over the past three decades"

"The synchronous period of global wind stilling reduces fluxes of wind-blown sand and creates the stability necessary to enable vegetation to colonise bare dune sand. "

"This ironically may have implications for how coastal erosion scenarios play out in the future with sediments not being allowed to migrate inland and some dune fringed coasts may accumulate more sand at their seaward edge than normal, effectively lessening their erosional potential as a result of buffering up dune erosion response to storms."

sidd
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: liefde on September 05, 2019, 03:44:18 PM
It's good to see that in the Netherlands we have a relative low temperature change in those scenario's;
Not as far as I can see. Olive trees and Figs are fairly common here now as well. We can grow pretty much every Mediterranean plant reasonably successful on our South facing gardens.
We have insects from the Mediterranean now, mosquitos and moths from sub-tropical areas are surviving our winters. Ticks no longer die in the winter. And triple the amount of heatwaves each Summer compared to the 1970s even. And I doubt we'll ever see an elfstedentocht again. Ice is too thin.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Klondike Kat on September 05, 2019, 04:01:57 PM
Lake Erie may be next wine belt:
https://buffalonews.com/2019/07/22/could-lake-eries-grape-belt-be-the-next-napa-valley/

Possibly.  The authors compare the Lake Erie wine growing region with Bordeaux and Tuscany, which are at higher latitudes.  Trends show that the growing season has already grown and according to the authors, “This warming trend could allow for the introduction of alternative grape varieties, drastically improving the limited availability of cool-climate ... cultivars,” the study concluded. “Varieties such as Merlot, Cabernet Sauvignon and Syrah, which require warmer climates, would likely thrive.” 
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: TerryM on September 06, 2019, 11:08:18 PM
^^
Vineyards have reached the southern city limits of Hamilton within the last 10 years, and that's a ways north of Lake Erie.
I wouldn't be surprised if the newer vineyards are even further north.


The palm trees at Port Dover and Turkey Point are a nice addition to the Beach Resorts, and I saw an ornamental banana tree in Vancouver yard last time I was out west.


The crops seem to be rushing north faster than many urbanites are aware.
Terry

Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 05, 2020, 03:23:46 PM
Has anyone tried calculating the balance between places becoming more livable and places becoming less livable?
For example, would 2˚C warming kill more people in Twinsburg from heat stroke than it would save from winter weather traffic accidents (for example)?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: kassy on January 05, 2020, 05:20:37 PM
That is not really possible since there are all kinds of different issues with different solutions so the outcome would be nonsense. You can project the current climate trend but we cannot project what measures will be taken or not.   
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on January 05, 2020, 11:46:49 PM
^^
Vineyards have reached the southern city limits of Hamilton within the last 10 years, and that's a ways north of Lake Erie.
I wouldn't be surprised if the newer vineyards are even further north.


The palm trees at Port Dover and Turkey Point are a nice addition to the Beach Resorts, and I saw an ornamental banana tree in Vancouver yard last time I was out west.


The crops seem to be rushing north faster than many urbanites are aware.
Terry

Crops can move as fast as people plant them. Forests will only move north if nations embark on an all out effort to move entire ecosystems north. It would be messy. Mistakes would be made but this kind of mitigation should already be occurring.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: TerryM on January 07, 2020, 07:33:11 AM
^^
Vineyards have reached the southern city limits of Hamilton within the last 10 years, and that's a ways north of Lake Erie.
I wouldn't be surprised if the newer vineyards are even further north.


The palm trees at Port Dover and Turkey Point are a nice addition to the Beach Resorts, and I saw an ornamental banana tree in Vancouver yard last time I was out west.


The crops seem to be rushing north faster than many urbanites are aware.
Terry

Crops can move as fast as people plant them. Forests will only move north if nations embark on an all out effort to move entire ecosystems north. It would be messy. Mistakes would be made but this kind of mitigation should already be occurring.


I'm not sure that it's possible here in Canada. We've lost millions of trees to pine beetles & will lose millions more. Our tree line is constrained in part by winter insolation, & it's hard to grow trees in the dark.


More southern climes may see alpine tree lines increase in elevation but increased desertification will more than undermine those gains. I think that fires, drought and flooding will have the greatest "natural" effects on forests. If we continue burning forests and bulldozing them for agriculture & industry the natural losses will never be mitigated.
Terry
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Sebastian Jones on January 07, 2020, 07:18:44 PM
^^
Vineyards have reached the southern city limits of Hamilton within the last 10 years, and that's a ways north of Lake Erie.
I wouldn't be surprised if the newer vineyards are even further north.


The palm trees at Port Dover and Turkey Point are a nice addition to the Beach Resorts, and I saw an ornamental banana tree in Vancouver yard last time I was out west.


The crops seem to be rushing north faster than many urbanites are aware.
Terry

Crops can move as fast as people plant them. Forests will only move north if nations embark on an all out effort to move entire ecosystems north. It would be messy. Mistakes would be made but this kind of mitigation should already be occurring.


I'm not sure that it's possible here in Canada. We've lost millions of trees to pine beetles & will lose millions more. Our tree line is constrained in part by winter insolation, & it's hard to grow trees in the dark.


More southern climes may see alpine tree lines increase in elevation but increased desertification will more than undermine those gains. I think that fires, drought and flooding will have the greatest "natural" effects on forests. If we continue burning forests and bulldozing them for agriculture & industry the natural losses will never be mitigated.
Terry

According to this research, there is another constraint on tree lines moving north. They do not identify the constraint, but I rather suspect it may have something to do with mycorrhiza- or rather their absence.
 https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/69593 (https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/arctic/article/view/69593)
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: TerryM on January 08, 2020, 04:28:46 PM
^^
Strange, just yesterday I'd been researching the thick beds of lichen I'd witnessed in the boreal forest of Northern Quebec. Beautiful, but delicate and unbelievably slow growing fungal/bacterial organisms in a symbiotic relationship.


Some seem to believe that in a warming world plant cultivation can simply move northward. Certain plants will undoubtedly make the transition, most will not. In much of Canada the glaciers striped away everything but rock, and rocks don't provide much for trees, (or crops) to live on.
Rock, muskeg and melting permafrost won't host food crops.
Terry
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on January 08, 2020, 05:23:14 PM
How can any place on the surface of the Earth become 'more livable'?
Isn't that overlooking the elephant-on-fire in the room?

'more livable' could mean the new safe place that climate refugees are seeking. Where can climate refugees best go to?
Of course that depends on money and passport type

'more livable' could mean you have money to buy airco or a boat. Or food or potable water.

'more livable' only for the short term.


Is that what is meant by the title of this thread?: Short term solutions?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: TerryM on January 08, 2020, 08:35:36 PM
^^
Perhaps it's a relative term, such as "Toronto will become more livable than Miami"?


My little neck of the woods certainly has become warmer, which at this latitude equals more livable for most.


When the grid eventually comes down, livability everywhere becomes problematic and long term solutions become less probable everywhere.


What appears short term to you might be terminal in my eyes. What timelines were you considering?
Terry
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on January 09, 2020, 07:36:51 AM
I refer to 'short term' because of the accelerating terminal effects of the elephant-on-fire in the room: The global AGW/Biosphere-collapse.
Civilisation will find out it can't survive without ecosystem functions and can't survive the effects of +4°C.

The idea of "Places becoming more livable" is absurd I think.

The idea of forests as an endangered resource is absurd I think. That view of other lifeforms is supremacy and insane.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on January 09, 2020, 08:00:00 AM

Civilisation will find out it can't survive without ecosystem functions and can't survive the effects of +4°C.

The idea of "Places becoming more livable" is absurd I think.


Civilization really can't survive without ecosystems. However, warming by itself will not cause ecosystem collapse. The world has seen huge temperature swings without ecosytem collapse, eg. at the end of the last ice age, European temperatures went up by 5-15 C within a matter of decades if not years (based on greenland ice core measurements!)

So, thinking that a 4 C temperature rise will somehow destroy ecosytems is totally baseless scientifically. There WILL be places becoming more liveable, Canada is a prime example - and most of Europe by the way. As for the tropics: they will have serious problems.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Aluminium on January 09, 2020, 08:37:18 AM
The most people live in relatively good climate with high chance to became worse. Some places currently almost unlivable because of low temperature or/and precipiation and easily may be more livable after moderate warming. Latitudes between -50°...+50° contain 77% of the surface and 80% of the land is not a desert.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on January 09, 2020, 10:55:00 AM
El Cid, anthropogenic biosphere collapse (and mass extinction of life) are happening without a high temperature rise. Civilisation is doing it by itself.
The +4°C GMST is a separate effect. It is from anthropogenic global warming i.e. civilisation is doing it.

I think you are deluded if you think Canada will improve. Wait until the forests start burning and dying. Wait until Canada has received millions of climate refugees. Could the Alberta tar sands burn? Where will Canada's food come from without ecosystem functions? Where will Canada's potable water come from once aquifers are empty? Glaciers are disappearing so no hydropower.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Avalonian on January 09, 2020, 11:46:09 AM


Civilization really can't survive without ecosystems. However, warming by itself will not cause ecosystem collapse. The world has seen huge temperature swings without ecosytem collapse, eg. at the end of the last ice age, European temperatures went up by 5-15 C within a matter of decades if not years (based on greenland ice core measurements!)

So, thinking that a 4 C temperature rise will somehow destroy ecosytems is totally baseless scientifically. There WILL be places becoming more liveable, Canada is a prime example - and most of Europe by the way. As for the tropics: they will have serious problems.

Disagree with this, El Cid. On the one hand, there is the critical issue of rate of change; while ecosystems and evolution can adapt to certain types of change, once it accelerates past a certain point those buffer systems struggle. That's the factor behind most of the mass extinction events: rapid changes, pushing things beyond the variability that organisms and ecosystems are adapted to.
    More importantly, though (and as you know) a rapid 4C rise in temperature is a summary; in reality, this is associated with preciptation changes, spread of oceanic dead zones, acidification, oxygenation fluctuations, and so on. It's not the temperature rise that matters, but everything that goes with it... and that is more than capable to pushing global ecosystems into a crisis in my view.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: oren on January 09, 2020, 11:55:42 AM
In addition to all the above: northern locations in Canada and Russia will become warmer and thus maybe more livable in theory, but when permafrost ground turns into a soggy bog and all housing and infrastructure built on it is damaged, I doubt the local inhabitants will thank AGW.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Hefaistos on January 09, 2020, 03:56:27 PM
...
 As for the tropics: they will have serious problems.

I strongly doubt that statement about the tropics - do you have some scientific evidence for that?
I think that deep convection handles most imbalances in the tropics. The serious problems will be in the subtropics.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: dnem on January 09, 2020, 04:25:11 PM
Comparing how a fully intact biosphere adapted to rapid climate change in the past with how the present, highly stressed, massively altered, depauperate, poisoned biosphere will respond to rapid AGW is meaningless. 

I have no doubt that enough genetic diversity will remain in the biosphere for it to recover over geologic time, but that is irrelevant to the reliance of 8+ billion humans on the biosphere over the coming decades.  Biosphere and ecosystem collapse will be a huge stressor on the ability of the earth to support the overlarge human population.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: KiwiGriff on January 09, 2020, 06:33:29 PM
Gaia will not care on her time scales its just a sneeze.
Humans on the other hand.
Coral reefs go at 1.5C that is in the next couple of decades. Many fisheries depend on the reefs for a part of their life cycle  as reefs decay coastlines will be exposed to more erosion.
The amazon transitions to savanna at about 3C . Borel forests are dying now with repercussions for permafrost and all the ecologys that depend on the forests. Fire and human infrastructure are not compatible as these forest change they will burn with more frequency.
 Many species will become extinct as our activity will block them adapting to the changes or migrating as the climate zones shift.

It is the speed of change and the delay between the old dying and the new ecology's that will arise that will effect us "smart" monkeys.

Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: gerontocrat on January 09, 2020, 07:09:49 PM
Gaia will not care on her time scales its just a sneeze.
In one of Lovelock's books he says the Planet Earth is in late middle age. Thus if we manage to snuff out most of life on earth (and ourselves), it may be too late for a new form of intelligent life to emerge. After all, it took a very long time for evolution to get to where it is now.

ps: Will NZ be more or less livable as the Land of the Long White Cloud gets its unfair share of climate refugees? (As has already started as the rich look for safe places).
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on January 09, 2020, 07:34:05 PM
^^
For the love of Earth, please don't let there be another intelligent species emerging. Some of them will again at some point feel supreme through technology and start a civilisation and initiate another total destruction. A new sort of human is the worst that could happen to future Earth life.
Intelligence -> rich fantasies mixed with emotions. Civilisation humans think they are a predator. Look at their teeth and molars. it is an Insane fantasy -> destruction.

Civilisation is only a small and recent part of humanity but the chance of one emerging from an intelligent species is almost 100%.
Civilisation is not life. It is anti-life.
Civilisation is supremacy -> insanity -> total destruction  (look what this civilisation has done to life, to the once beautiful Earth)
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: KiwiGriff on January 09, 2020, 07:56:14 PM
I used to think NZ would get off due to the moderation effects of the pacific ocean
I am not so sure now as the risk for one of our city's getting hammered by a tropical cyclone rises each year. Our building codes do not encompass that higher wind speed. 
The result when one hits will be a cyclone Tracy level of destruction. Google it.
NZ has one of the longest coastlines of any country sea level rise will have a huge impact here.

As to refugees To remote for us to get tens of thousands  boat people.
The rich? They bring money so good for our economy at present.
 Some  seem to think coming here will be viable bolt hole if civilization collapses.
If your money is no good and you don't bring the skill sets needed you will not be  safer here.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on January 09, 2020, 08:09:21 PM
Comparing how a fully intact biosphere adapted to rapid climate change in the past with how the present, highly stressed, massively altered, depauperate, poisoned biosphere will respond to rapid AGW is meaningless. 

I have no doubt that enough genetic diversity will remain in the biosphere for it to recover over geologic time, but that is irrelevant to the reliance of 8+ billion humans on the biosphere over the coming decades.  Biosphere and ecosystem collapse will be a huge stressor on the ability of the earth to support the overlarge human population.

I agree.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on January 12, 2020, 01:57:16 PM
Couple of points:

- As I have said (and proven by science), previous ice ages came and ended very-very quickly (in a matter of years or decades with 5-15 C swings!), probably even quicker than the current era of AGW, so the idea that ecosystems will not be able to cope is quite groundless...to which you reply: but those were "intact" ecosystems. Well, it does not matter. Adaptation speed is not dependent on species number, it is based on adaptation speed.
- but, but: precipitation patterns will change. YES, they will. We had a Green Sahara just 5 k years ago, and forests in Central Asia. This is nothing new. We might even see the Sahara greening again!
- permafrost: I attach a map of the permafrost. Cca 1 million million people live in those areas in NA (750k in Alaska and at most 250 k in canada), and a maximum of 3-5 million in Russia (the whole of Yakutia eg has only 1 million people on 3 m sq km!!!) and it is not a surprise, it's not nice there. This is a non-issue relative to the size of the economy
- NZ: I think more people will die of earthquakes there during this century than due to climate change. It is very much protected, probably one of the biggest winners
- human population: this is absolutely true, there are simply too many humans for this planet, but I do not think that any of you would have an IMMEDIATE solution
- if electricity goes all goes...well I would refer to WW2. It seems  that you can have a normal country and government with little food and electricity (eg Russia or UK)

All in all, climate change will undoubtedly hurt, but humans are much more adaptable than you would think. Witness the 2 world wars, or just the last one in Germany: everything was destroyed there and yet, after 20 years they emerged as a highly developed country again.

I am not saying that nothing is to be done - on the contrary, many things will have to change: what we eat, what we wear, how we travel, how we build our homes, etc, etc. This is happening. Yes, it should happen faster, I agree, but don't count out humans just yet!
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 12, 2020, 03:26:36 PM
Quote
All in all, climate change will undoubtedly hurt, but humans are much more adaptable than you would think. Witness the 2 world wars, or just the last one in Germany: everything was destroyed there and yet, after 20 years they emerged as a highly developed country again.
How long would it have taken Germany without the Marshall Plan and the rest of the world helping?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: blumenkraft on January 12, 2020, 03:36:02 PM
Can't be said the Marshall Plan didn't help Germany, but it also can't be said how it would have evolved without one.

I think the most visionary intention of the Marshall Plan was to interconnect Germany with other countries in Europe economically.

The EU might have never evolved?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on January 12, 2020, 03:43:14 PM
...but don't count out humans just yet!

I absolutely agree. Would not be at all surprised if 1 billion humans make it through the great winnowing.

What that will look like in 2200 is a subject for science fiction writers but we should not expect anything that looks like modern civilization.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: gerontocrat on January 12, 2020, 04:21:03 PM
...but don't count out humans just yet!

I absolutely agree. Would not be at all surprised if 1 billion humans make it through the great winnowing.

What that will look like in 2200 is a subject for science fiction writers but we should not expect anything that looks like modern civilization.
we should not expect anything that looks like modern civilization.  ??

plus ça change

exclamation
used to express resigned acknowledgement of the fundamental immutability of human nature and institutions.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 12, 2020, 04:25:45 PM
...but don't count out humans just yet!

I absolutely agree. Would not be at all surprised if 1 billion humans make it through the great winnowing.

What that will look like in 2200 is a subject for science fiction writers but we should not expect anything that looks like modern civilization.
Since we had more than that before FF and the Americas were not fully settled, that seems reasonable.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: dnem on January 12, 2020, 04:29:14 PM
...but don't count out humans just yet!

I absolutely agree. Would not be at all surprised if 1 billion humans make it through the great winnowing.

I generally agree SH. There is one wildcard out there that I can't quite wrap my head around.  (And this is probably the wrong thread for it). What is the likelihood that systems fail to the degree that we cannot maintain cooling and control at multiple (hundreds?) of nuclear reactor and waste storage sites and we have hundreds of simultaneous meltdowns? It's something I read about but don't have the expertise to assess.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 12, 2020, 04:34:23 PM
...but don't count out humans just yet!

I absolutely agree. Would not be at all surprised if 1 billion humans make it through the great winnowing.

I generally agree SH. There is one wildcard out there that I can't quite wrap my head around.  (And this is probably the wrong thread for it). What is the likelihood that systems fail to the degree that we cannot maintain cooling and control at multiple (hundreds?) of nuclear reactor and waste storage sites and we have hundreds of simultaneous meltdowns? It's something I read about but don't have the expertise to assess.
In Greer’s novel (the ecosophia guy) so many reactors melted down that mutants were common and large areas uninhabitable.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: oren on January 12, 2020, 11:48:22 PM
Quote
- human population: this is absolutely true, there are simply too many humans for this planet, but I do not think that any of you would have an IMMEDIATE solution
El cid, on the contrary, the immediate solution is to reduce childbirth to one per woman, this would reduce global population in 2050 (which I estimate will be the crisis point) by about 2.5 billion down from the expected 10 billion.

Quote
Since we had more than that before FF and the Americas were not fully settled, that seems reasonable.
Bear in mind those 1 billion people back in 1800 had much lower levels of resource consumption per capita, resources were more abundant, and the global environment with much less cumulative pollution.
However, barring some extra human-made catastrophe (WW3, nuclear plant meltdowns, pandemic, Mad Max dystopia etc.) I also estimate the Earth post-AGW will be able to support roughly a billion humans.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on January 13, 2020, 08:02:10 AM
Yes, Oren, we all know that the theoretical solution is reducing childbirth, but that is not a solution in reality because you can not make it happen. Look at Africa: 1 billion people in 1995, 2 billion by 2050 and 4 by 2100 - based on current projections (and demographics is not easy to change).
My question was not based on theory but about actual, doable solutions.

As for your projection that a post AGW world would be able to support only 1 billion people I find it highly doubtful as we can already easily grow enough food for 15 billion (provided that meat is off the table)

Tom,

The Marshall plan was not very big for Germany. The USA gave away 12 billion usd, of which "only" 1.5 billion went to Germany. In total, recipient countries received cca 3% of their GDP, Germany received less than that, cca 1-2%. For comparison: Eastern European countries received 10-30 (!!!!) % of their GDP during 2013-2020 from EU funds.

As for places becoming more liveable, I agree with Voltaire: tend to your gardens, and the world will become a better place :)
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: blumenkraft on January 13, 2020, 08:32:33 AM
Well, the Marshall Plan was way more than just financial aid, El Cid.

Also:

Quote
The Marshall Plan provided aid to the recipients essentially on a per capita basis, with larger amounts given to major industrial powers, such as West Germany, France and Great Britain. This was based on the belief of Marshall and his advisors that recovery in these larger nations was essential to overall European recovery.

Still, not all participating nations benefitted equally. Nations such as Italy, who had fought with the Axis powers alongside Nazi Germany, and those who remained neutral (e.g., Switzerland) received less assistance per capita than those countries who fought with the United States and the other Allied powers.

The notable exception was West Germany: Though all of Germany was damaged significantly toward the end of World War II, a viable and revitalized West Germany was seen as essential to economic stability in the region, and as a not-so-subtle rebuke of the communist government and economic system on the other side of the “Iron Curtain” in East Germany.

Link >> https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/marshall-plan-1
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on January 13, 2020, 04:41:11 PM
this is OT, but my above numbers are correct

my original statement was that humanity (if well organized and having a certain culture/workethic, you name it) can come back from real serious collapses, just like it happened after ww2 in many countries, most notably germany. the marshall plan was miniscule relative to the huge comeback of germany (or italy for that matter) or relative to the aid new eu members receive. It was not due to aid but due to determination, culture, societal structure, etc. The same would happen if for any unknown reason the grid would collapse
 
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on January 13, 2020, 05:19:32 PM
El Cid, the world has changed 'a bit' since WW2. Our current culture is unrecognizable to people from those times.
Have you taken that into account?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 13, 2020, 06:32:13 PM
El Cid:
I'm not so sure Western Civilization, especially the US, has that kind of culture.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: gerontocrat on January 18, 2020, 01:18:05 PM
As to refugees To remote for us to get tens of thousands  boat people.
The rich? They bring money so good for our economy at present.
 Some  seem to think coming here will be viable bolt hole if civilization collapses.
If your money is no good and you don't bring the skill sets needed you will not be  safer here.
The rich? They bring money so good for our economy at present ???

Perhaps not so much money.
Perhaps some really weird people with really weird ideas.

The attached link is a really long read - but if I was a Kiwi I would be a bit alarmed. I am sending it to a brother (naturalised Kiwi) in Motueka.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/feb/15/why-silicon-valley-billionaires-are-prepping-for-the-apocalypse-in-new-zealand
Quote
Why Silicon Valley billionaires are prepping for the apocalypse in New Zealand

How an extreme libertarian tract predicting the collapse of liberal democracies – written by Jacob Rees-Mogg’s father – inspired the likes of Peter Thiel to buy up property across the Pacific.
The book’s 400-odd pages of near-hysterical orotundity can roughly be broken down into the following sequence of propositions:

1) The democratic nation-state basically operates like a criminal cartel, forcing honest citizens to surrender large portions of their wealth to pay for stuff like roads and hospitals and schools.

2) The rise of the internet, and the advent of cryptocurrencies, will make it impossible for governments to intervene in private transactions and to tax incomes, thereby liberating individuals from the political protection racket of democracy.

3) The state will consequently become obsolete as a political entity.

4) Out of this wreckage will emerge a new global dispensation, in which a “cognitive elite” will rise to power and influence, as a class of sovereign individuals “commanding vastly greater resources” who will no longer be subject to the power of nation-states and will redesign governments to suit their ends.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: oren on January 18, 2020, 03:02:20 PM
Oh dear.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: gerontocrat on January 18, 2020, 03:27:07 PM
Oh dear.
That really really weird weirdo Peter Thiel was of course with Musk in the Paypal Mafia.
Betcha they were fans of  Ayn Rand - "Atlas Shruged" & all that. Lots of Silicon Valley big chiefs were (are?) entranced by her "philosophy" (Alan Greenspan literally sat at her feet in the '50's).

Doesn't it make you feel all cosy and warm?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on January 18, 2020, 05:01:21 PM
I think I see that already happening. Many governments are no more than lackeys of those people behind the scenes. e.g. Morrison.
Is this related? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_the_Leisure_Class

Quote from: gerontocrat
I am sending it to a brother
There are more of you? OMG  ;D
I wish I had smart siblings.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 18, 2020, 06:07:41 PM
... the immediate solution is to reduce childbirth to one per woman...

A more effective control of population would be to reduce to one child per man.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on January 18, 2020, 06:09:08 PM
... the immediate solution is to reduce childbirth to one per woman...

A more effective control of population would be to reduce to one child per man.
Why would that be any different?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: KiwiGriff on January 18, 2020, 08:38:10 PM
Quote
A more effective control of population would be to reduce to one child per man.
Very good Sig.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: gerontocrat on January 18, 2020, 09:22:27 PM
... the immediate solution is to reduce childbirth to one per woman...
A more effective control of population would be to reduce to one child per man.
Experience shows that the education of young women and affordable access to contraception is the most effective way of reducing the birthrate. 

Surely the idea is to give women control over how many children they have (if any), and who will be the father. This certainly seems to be the case in Japan and China, where despite exhortations by Governments composed mostly of grumpy old men like me, birthrates are less than that required to maintain the population.

The same applies in much of Europe, and to some extent in the US despite campaigns and laws mainly instigated by Christian Evangelicals, who seem to have little use for the New Testament (except maybe the letters of Paul - the original Male Chauvinist Pig who reduced so many women to status of Chattels and a life of servitude and slavery for nearly 2 thousand years).

see post re China @
 https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,956.msg245059.html#msg245059
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on January 19, 2020, 05:01:03 AM
In these unprecendented times where the future of children is getting likely horrible, it could be that conscious knowledgable women don't want to have children because of empathy and a feeling of responsibility for the possibly horrible future for them.
As the AGW/Biosphere-collapse catastrophy unfolds and acceleratingly worsens, more and more might make that decision until at some point maybe they don't even want to have children because of their own vulnerability in the care for a newborn in a very difficult environment.
It depends on how fast the disasters will hit their country and themselves personally, and how the media change the message I think.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Sigmetnow on January 19, 2020, 09:46:57 PM
... the immediate solution is to reduce childbirth to one per woman...

A more effective control of population would be to reduce to one child per man.
Why would that be any different?

A woman can give birth no more often than about every 9 months, whereas a man can impregnate multiple women in that time.

Too many “population control” discussions involve ‘control’ or ‘restrictions’ of women, but what is missing is the matching concept of controlling men....
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: TerryM on January 20, 2020, 03:25:40 AM
Ideally the decision about parenting a child should be mutual between both parents.
Historically, and probably due to sexual dimorphism, males have claimed the upper hand.


Empowering women (or alternatively dis-empowering men) swings the pendulum toward a more neutral position. Education plays an important role in equalizing this balance of power.


Forcing women (or couples) to raise an unwanted child is barbaric. Forcing a woman to complete her pregnancy against her will is an unthinkable demonstration of domination.


Terry
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on January 20, 2020, 06:35:03 AM
Thanks Sigmetnow and Terry for that view.

To add:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_infertility_crisis:

Quote
The male infertility crisis is a term used by the popular media to describe the rapid decrease in sperm quality, and consequential problems with male infertility, seen over the 40 year period starting in the late 1970s.[1] Over that time period, the number of viable sperm in men in Australia, Europe, New Zealand and North America has roughly halved, falling at a rate of 1.4% per year.[2][3] This reduction has not been seen in other parts of the world.[4] A number of hypotheses have been put forward for the causes of the decline, including lifestyle factors and the presence of hormone-disrupting chemicals in the environment.[4]
(emphases by me)
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tor Bejnar on May 16, 2020, 10:17:42 PM
Wild white storks born in UK for first time in centuries  (https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/wild-white-storks-born-uk-a4442441.html)
... more livable for storks, anyway ...
Quote
White storks have hatched in the UK for the first time in about 600 years.

The chicks were born from one of three nests in the Knepp Estate in West Sussex on Friday. Onlookers watched as the parents regurgitated food to feed the chicks in their nest on an oak tree.

The same pair also tried to breed last year at the Knepp Estate - but without success.

There is evidence that storks have been breeding in the UK for around 360,000 years.
...
... except not for the past 600 years.

I suppose we should say, "Welcome home!"
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tom_Mazanec on October 19, 2020, 01:26:21 PM
Three Places That Will Actually Benefit From Climate Change
https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2020/10/19/three_places_that_will_actually_benefit_from_climate_change.html
The three places are:
1. Northern Minnesota and Michigan's Upper Peninsula.
2. The Nordic Region.
3. Canada.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on October 19, 2020, 01:41:36 PM
Three Places That Will Actually Benefit From Climate Change
https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2020/10/19/three_places_that_will_actually_benefit_from_climate_change.html
The three places are:
1. Northern Minnesota and Michigan's Upper Peninsula.
2. The Nordic Region.
3. Canada.

I would say most places north of 40N
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: gerontocrat on October 19, 2020, 07:13:01 PM
Three Places That Will Actually Benefit From Climate Change
https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2020/10/19/three_places_that_will_actually_benefit_from_climate_change.html
The three places are:
1. Northern Minnesota and Michigan's Upper Peninsula.
2. The Nordic Region.
3. Canada.
I would say most places north of 40N
I guess "Places becoming more livable"  means for humans and somespecies that can move north.

For many species with specialised adaptations for cold climates it's going to be "game over".

And maybe large areas of low-lying tundra are going to become WaterWorld.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: harpy on October 19, 2020, 07:53:18 PM
In these unprecendented times where the future of children is getting likely horrible, it could be that conscious knowledgable women don't want to have children because of empathy and a feeling of responsibility for the possibly horrible future for them.
As the AGW/Biosphere-collapse catastrophy unfolds and acceleratingly worsens, more and more might make that decision until at some point maybe they don't even want to have children because of their own vulnerability in the care for a newborn in a very difficult environment.
It depends on how fast the disasters will hit their country and themselves personally, and how the media change the message I think.

The vast majority of people who have children have virtually no planning or logic behind their decision, its a purely emotional impulse. 

Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: wili on October 19, 2020, 09:14:57 PM
Yes, 'more livable' is of course rather subjective.

I live in Minnesota, and the people in the northern part of the state, that I've heard about, are worried because winters are getting warmer, so the many locations for skiing and similar outdoor winter sports are no longer reliably snowy. This has made it hard for many tourist businesses to make it.

Moose (another tourist draw) are disappearing, forests are dying of beetles and of lack of the cold necessary for their reproductive cycle, replacement with species from further south is a slow process...
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on October 20, 2020, 07:23:35 AM
I agree harpy, but I think it is not a "purely emotional impulse".
It is no more than what you're 'supposed' to do; what is 'normal'.
If you don't have children you are the odd one out.
Because it is step 4 of the short standard life-menu of civilisation culture, after step 1 "formal education and forced change into a grown-up"; step 2 "find job"; step 3 "find partner and engage in long-term bond".
Step 5 "material accumulation and career-ladder progress" (which has nothing to do with a real life); step 6 "Pension".
Most of these things are choices but not seen as such.

Apologies for off-topic.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on October 20, 2020, 07:48:19 AM
Actually, for some of us, finding a loving wife (husband), who is your best friend and real mate is not a social obligation but a joyful experience every day. Same stands for children. In a loving family, every day is Christmas. Truly.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: kassy on October 20, 2020, 01:54:50 PM
The discussion is indeed off topic so should be continued in either the Population thread or OTOT.

As to places becoming more liveable... these are climate winners or places that are sheltered from the worst effects climate wise but they still depend on the rest of the world for a lot of food services.

Much of the northern lands are not good for farming since they have no proper soils.

Another problem is that when they become desirable places to be a lot of people want to move there so at least it will drive up the prices locally. Think of this as global gentrification.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: blu_ice on October 20, 2020, 03:15:04 PM
Climate change is a lose-lose game. Some are just losing more than the others. High latitudes are supposed to be the relative winners.  Unfortunately there may be unforeseen risks due to higher rate of temperature change.

Rapid change means high fluctuation which by itself makes agriculture difficult, even when average conditions would become more favorable.

Then there are the truly black swans. We cannot rule out major geoengineering experiments taking place later this century. In fact they are quite likely, given our inadequate measures to combat climate change. A sudden cooling caused by sunlight blocking particles would be catastrophic at high latitudes.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: The Walrus on October 20, 2020, 03:31:31 PM
Climate change is a lose-lose game. Some are just losing more than the others. High latitudes are supposed to be the relative winners.  Unfortunately there may be unforeseen risks due to higher rate of temperature change.

Rapid change means high fluctuation which by itself makes agriculture difficult, even when average conditions would become more favorable.

Then there are the truly black swans. We cannot rule out major geoengineering experiments taking place later this century. In fact they are quite likely, given our inadequate measures to combat climate change. A sudden cooling caused by sunlight blocking particles would be catastrophic at high latitudes.

There may be unforeseen risks and unforeseen benefits.  One must look at the big picture when assessing consequences.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on October 20, 2020, 04:03:02 PM
Ok, so NH northerly latitudes will not be winners, because we MIGHT geoengineer them back to the ice age after people have moved there.

makes sense :) :) :)
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Tor Bejnar on October 20, 2020, 04:18:05 PM
Then future scientists will be able to study our mummified remains, as we study Ötzi today.   ::)   What a wonderful opportunity for those scientists!  ;D
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: oren on October 21, 2020, 04:07:19 AM
While high northerly latitudes could indeed be relative winners, permafrost degradation could be one counter-feedback, and increased forest fires (due to shift in the ecological regions of existing tree species) could be another.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: blu_ice on October 21, 2020, 01:50:27 PM
Ok, so NH northerly latitudes will not be winners, because we MIGHT geoengineer them back to the ice age after people have moved there.

makes sense :) :) :)
Yes, that's exactly what I said...  ::)

High latitudes will be relative winners, unless rapid rate of change offsets the benefits of warming climate.  But a lot depends how our fellow humans down south behave when their countries turn into unlivable hellscapes (<-- figure of speech, pls don't take this literally). I doubt economic chaos, famine, disease and war stays within the hottest areas of our planet.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on October 21, 2020, 02:58:14 PM
While high northerly latitudes could indeed be relative winners, permafrost degradation could be one counter-feedback, and increased forest fires (due to shift in the ecological regions of existing tree species) could be another.

I would argue that there will be few, if any, large regions of the planet that benefit from what is happening. What we will have instead are areas that are smaller losers than other areas. This distinction matters as we cannot expect regions to benefit and thus increase their carrying capacity for humans.

Over the remainder of this century, unchecked AGW which is our current state and track will inevitably result in the deaths of hundreds of millions. The next century will be far worse.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on October 21, 2020, 03:52:05 PM
I believe that Co2 emissions will be cut drastically by 2050 (50-80% from today's levels) and eliminated by 2100. No Arctic sea ice from June till December (like the Hudson).
Most anything beyond 40 N will be warmer, wetter and more productive agriculturally. I think that we shall once again have a Green Sahara with huge new areas to grow food. I also believe that current puny 1-1,5 t/ha average grain yields in Africa will reach East Asian averages of cca 4-5 t/ha. 
Stockholm will be the new Paris, London will be the new Rome. Pensioners will flock to Ireland to buy holiday homes on the island with the most pleasant climate. Russia and Canada will be the breadbaskets of the world.

I am dead serious.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: greylib on October 21, 2020, 04:49:33 PM
I am dead serious.
And you're mostly dead wrong, except for this bit:
Quote
I believe that Co2 emissions will be cut drastically by 2050 (50-80% from today's levels) and eliminated by 2100. No Arctic sea ice from June till December (like the Hudson).
You say:
Quote
Most anything beyond 40 N will be warmer, wetter and more productive agriculturally. I think that we shall once again have a Green Sahara with huge new areas to grow food. I also believe that current puny 1-1,5 t/ha average grain yields in Africa will reach East Asian averages of cca 4-5 t/ha. 
Stockholm will be the new Paris, London will be the new Rome. Pensioners will flock to Ireland to buy holiday homes on the island with the most pleasant climate. Russia and Canada will be the breadbaskets of the world.
Warmer, yes. Wetter, yes. More productive? Not without a heck of a lot of work to turn ex-tundra into agricultural land. The climate will still be changing - how do you make the decision on what crops are likely to grow?

The Sahara isn't going to go green unless you can convince the African peasantry that goats are a threat, not a status symbol.

I like Stockholm, but comparing it to Paris is silly. Paris didn't get its reputation, and its tourists, from its mild climate. London had its turn at being the "new Rome" 150 years ago. Time for somewhere else to try.

Ireland? Pleasant climate for oldies? It's already getting too much rain for mass tourism, with, as you say, more to come at the turn of the century. Florida it isn't!

Russia and Canada the breadbaskets of the world? They're growing quite a lot of cereal crops now. Will they be growing more? Or will the erratic climate destabilise things?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: The Walrus on October 21, 2020, 05:01:30 PM
I believe that Co2 emissions will be cut drastically by 2050 (50-80% from today's levels) and eliminated by 2100. No Arctic sea ice from June till December (like the Hudson).
Most anything beyond 40 N will be warmer, wetter and more productive agriculturally. I think that we shall once again have a Green Sahara with huge new areas to grow food. I also believe that current puny 1-1,5 t/ha average grain yields in Africa will reach East Asian averages of cca 4-5 t/ha. 
Stockholm will be the new Paris, London will be the new Rome. Pensioners will flock to Ireland to buy holiday homes on the island with the most pleasant climate. Russia and Canada will be the breadbaskets of the world.

I am dead serious.

I would agree.  During previous warmer (and wetter) times, the Sahara and higher latitudes were greener.  I see no reason that this time should be any different.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Général de GuerreLasse on October 21, 2020, 07:07:28 PM
I am dead serious.
And you're mostly dead wrong, except for this bit:
Quote
I believe that Co2 emissions will be cut drastically by 2050 (50-80% from today's levels) and eliminated by 2100. No Arctic sea ice from June till December (like the Hudson).
You say:
Quote
Most anything beyond 40 N will be warmer, wetter and more productive agriculturally. I think that we shall once again have a Green Sahara with huge new areas to grow food. I also believe that current puny 1-1,5 t/ha average grain yields in Africa will reach East Asian averages of cca 4-5 t/ha. 



The Sahara isn't going to go green unless you can convince the African peasantry that goats are a threat, not a status symbol.


Even if it rains enough on the Sahara one day, it will take years of hard work to replenish the soil to make it fertile again and grow good vegetables. Plenty of time to starve to death. It is also likely that future temperatures will make it even more difficult to grow useful things. I'm not even talking about possible grasshopper problems and other nasty surprises.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on October 21, 2020, 07:48:50 PM
I'm not even talking about possible grasshopper problems and other nasty surprises.

Yes, I am sure Sahara dwellers will be very sad to see grasshoppers after looking at the sand for thousands of years
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: kassy on October 21, 2020, 09:29:37 PM
The Sahara has no real soil. Yes it was green before but that took time, probably quite some time compared too human generations. It is not going to magically appear.

Same for much of the rest of the northern soils and we don´t really know what will happen because we are pushing the system harder then it has been pushed before.

Cutting drastically by 2050 sounds cool but where does that lead us when current values will probably knock out Artic ice this decade, Siberia is already a net carbon contributor and Antarctica is falling apart (only the edges but that is where it starts)?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on October 21, 2020, 11:07:39 PM
I believe that Co2 emissions will be cut drastically by 2050 (50-80% from today's levels) and eliminated by 2100.

I believe in unicorns and sparkle ponies.

In my opinion, there is actually no evidence of this being likely to occur.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: gerontocrat on October 21, 2020, 11:09:51 PM
While high northerly latitudes could indeed be relative winners, permafrost degradation could be one counter-feedback,
Methinks it might be advisable change "could be" to "will be"

It is not just a case of getting warmer and the land drying out and bingo, you've got cropland.

Quote
Permafrost ranges in thickness from 1500 m in Siberia and 740 m in Alaska to just a few meters in its lower latitude extremes. Typically thicknesses range from 100 to 800 m in continuous permafrost, 25 to 100 m in discontinuous permafrost, and 10 to 50 m in sporadic permafrost.
https://www.britannica.com/science/permafrost/Ice-content
Quote
World estimates of the amount of ice in permafrost vary from 200,000 to 500,000 cubic kilometres (49,000 to 122,000 cubic miles), or less than 1 percent of the total volume of the Earth. It has been estimated that 10 percent by volume of the upper 3 metres of permafrost on the northern Coastal Plain of Alaska is composed of foliated ground ice (ice wedges). Taber ice is the most extensive type of ground ice, and in places it represents 75 percent of the ground by volume. It is calculated that the pore and Taber ice content in the depth between 0.5 and 3 metres (surface to 0.5 metre is seasonally thawed) is 61 percent by volume, and between 3 and 9 metres it is 41 percent. The total amount of pingo ice is less than 0.1 percent of the permafrost. The total ice content in the permafrost of the Arctic Coastal Plain of Alaska is estimated to be 1,500 cubic kilometres, and below 9 metres most of that is present as pore ice.

Thermokarst formations
The thawing of permafrost creates thermokarst topography, an uneven surface that contains mounds, sinkholes, tunnels, caverns, and steep-walled ravines caused by melting of ground ice. The hummocky ground surface resembles karst topography in limestone areas. Thawing may result from artificial or natural removal of vegetation or from a warming climate.

Thawed depressions filled with water (thaw lakes, thermokarst lakes, cave-in lakes) are widespread in permafrost areas, especially in those underlain with perennially frozen silt. They may occur on hillsides or even on hilltops and are good indicators of ice-rich permafrost. Locally, deep thermokarst pits 6 metres deep and 9 metres across may form as ground ice melts. These openings may exist as undetected caverns for many years before the roof collapses. Such collapses in agricultural or construction areas are real dangers. Thermokarst mounds are polygonal or circular hummocks 3 to 15 metres in diameter and 0.3 to 2.5 metres high that are formed as a polygonal network of ice melts and leaves the inner-ice areas as mounds.

Pingos
The most spectacular landforms associated with permafrost are pingos, small ice-cored circular or elliptical hills of frozen sediments or even bedrock, 3 to more than 60 metres high and 15 to 450 metres in diameter. Pingos are widespread in the continuous permafrost zone and are quite conspicuous because they rise above the tundra. They are much less conspicuous in the forested area of the discontinuous permafrost zone. They are generally cracked on top with summit craters formed by melting ice. There are two types of pingos, based on origin. The closed-system type forms in level areas when unfrozen groundwater in a thawed zone becomes confined on all sides by permafrost, freezes, and heaves the frozen overburden to form a mound. This type is larger and occurs mainly in tundra areas of continuous permafrost. The open-system type is generally smaller and forms on slopes when water beneath or within the permafrost penetrates the permafrost under hydrostatic pressure. A hydrolaccolith (water mound) forms and freezes, heaving the overlying frozen and unfrozen ground to produce a mound.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on October 21, 2020, 11:17:36 PM
Thawing permafrost will never be suitable for agriculture.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Général de GuerreLasse on October 21, 2020, 11:37:48 PM
I'm not even talking about possible grasshopper problems and other nasty surprises.

Yes, I am sure Sahara dwellers will be very sad to see grasshoppers after looking at the sand for thousands of years

I'm sure you can do better.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Ken Feldman on October 22, 2020, 12:26:18 AM
Farmers across Africa have been regreening the Sahel and reversing desertification for decades.  Crop yields are much higher now than they were in the '80s. 

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/great-green-wall-stop-desertification-not-so-much-180960171/ (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/great-green-wall-stop-desertification-not-so-much-180960171/)

Quote
The Age of Humans
The “Great Green Wall” Didn’t Stop Desertification, but it Evolved Into Something That Might
The multibillion-dollar effort to plant a 4,000-mile-long wall of trees hit some snags along the way, but there’s still hope

By Jim Morrison
smithsonianmag.com
August 23, 2016

It was a simple plan to combat a complex problem. The plan: plant a Great Green Wall of trees 10 miles wide and 4,350 miles long, bisecting a dozen countries from Senegal in the west to Djibouti in the east. The problem: the creeping desertification across Africa.

Quote
Planting trees across the Sahel, the arid savanna on the south border of the Sahara Desert, had no chance to succeed. There was little funding. There was no science suggesting it would work. Moreover, the desert was not actually moving south; instead, overuse was denuding the land. Large chunks of the proposed "wall" were uninhabited, meaning no one would be there to care for the saplings.

Quote
Reij, Garrity and other scientists working on the ground knew what Wade and other political leaders did not: that farmers in Niger and Burkina Faso, in particular, had discovered a cheap, effective way to regreen the Sahel. They did so by using simple water harvesting techniques and protecting trees that emerged naturally on their farms.

Slowly, the idea of a Great Green Wall has changed into a program centered around indigenous land use techniques, not planting a forest on the edge of a desert. The African Union and the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization now refer to it as "Africa’s flagship initiative to combat land degradation, desertification and drought." Incredibly, the Great Green Wall—or some form of it—appears to be working.

"We moved the vision of the Great Green Wall from one that was impractical to one that was practical," says Mohamed Bakarr, the lead environmental specialist for Global Environment Facility, the organization that examines the environmental benefit of World Bank projects. "It is not necessarily a physical wall, but rather a mosaic of land use practices that ultimately will meet the expectations of a wall. It has been transformed into a metaphorical thing."

Quote
Reij, now based in Amsterdam, began working in the Sahel when the soil literally was blowing away during dust storms. After years away, Reij returned to Niger and Burkina Faso in the summer of 2004. He was stunned by what he saw, green where there had been nothing but tan, denuded land. He quickly secured funding for the first of several studies looking at farming in villages throughout Burkina Faso and Niger.

Quote
Over two years traveling through Burkina Faso and Niger, they uncovered a remarkable metamorphosis. Hundreds of thousands of farmers had embraced ingenious modifications of traditional agriculture practices, transforming large swaths into productive land, improving food and fuel production for about 3 million people.

Quote
Garrity recalls walking through farms in Niger, fields of grains like millet and sorghum stretching to the sun planted around trees, anywhere from a handful to 80 per acre. “In most cases, the trees are in random locations because they sprouted and the farmer protected them and let them grow,” he says. The trees can be cut for fuel, freeing women who once spent two and a half hours a day collecting wood to do other tasks. They can be pruned for livestock fodder. Their leaves and fruit are nutritious.

Quote
From 2004 on, they published a series of research papers and reports sounding the call about the transformation. Reij says that by 2011, there were more than 12 million acres restored in Niger alone. More than 1.2 million were restored in Mali, but no one knew until 2010 because no one looked.

The key, Reij says, is scaling up the effort in the drylands countries by building up grassroots efforts, addressing the legal issues (like tree ownership), and creating markets for the products of agroforestry. "We've never seen anything near this size and impact on the environment anywhere in west Africa," Tappan adds. "In our mind Niger already has its great green wall. It's only a matter of scaling it up."

Reij says the World Bank—which has committed $1.2 billion to the effort—the Global Environment Facility and others are convinced natural regeneration is an important way forward, but the approaches are up to each country. At the African Union, Elvis Paul Tangem, coordinator of the Great Green Wall for the Sahara and Sahel Initiative, says that 21 countries now have projects within the framework of the initiative.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on October 22, 2020, 02:11:55 AM
Thanks Ken. Love reading about things like this.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on October 22, 2020, 07:25:56 AM
Agroforestry is by now a proven method for drylands. Water harvesting techniques plus planting mostly nitrogen fixing trees (eg. Inga species, see eg here: https://www.rainforestsaver.org/inga-alley-cropping-manual)
make it possible to grow crops with little water and no or little fertilizer.

Basically, the trees shade and protect the ground during the (often very long) dry season and are then pruned heavily (to chest height) before the wet season. The cuttings and leaves, rich in nitrogen, are spread in the tree alley, fertilizing it. They sow grains, which sprout and grow quickly as the rains arrive. By the time of the harvest, the canopy closes again and the cycle begins anew.

A wonderful film about how the Chinese regreened the deserted Loess Plateau, a must watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDgDWbQtlKI&t=2505s

Also, greening the desert project in Jordan, by permaculturalist Geoff Lawton:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keQUqRg2qZ0&t=297s

These two films are truly about places becoming more liveable. We can do this.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: nanning on October 22, 2020, 10:50:13 AM
In the analyses above I miss some important factors (some are mentioned):
    Accelerating biosphere/ecosystems collapse; mass extinctions, insectageddon, habitat loss, pollution etc.

It is not just us that wants to move to a safer livable place. All of living nature that can't move fast enough will vanish.
Microplastics will have large negative consequences on all kinds of animals, from small to large.
Continued use of biocides is not helping either.
The oceanic/inland seas' 'dead zones' are fast increasing.
Corals are dying/going extinct with ever increasing ocean temps.

What kind of 'ecosystem services' will remain functional?
It is an immense interconnected system of mutual dependencies. Ecosystem collapse will beyond some point become an avalance, one after the other will disappear once the core interconnected structure is gone (redundancy gone).

Weather extremes are increasing fast it seems, going by the past 5 years. No stable climate anymore.

Then of course there need to be houses and infrastructure and (poor) people to do the menial tasks in the favored new place.  Is the country perhaps a target for war? And the destination country needs to welcome you and not send you back/enprison you!

So I guess that it also largely depends on your 'net worth'.

I think that all the proposed 'solutions' are only for the same happy few richest percents that are mainly responsible for the destruction throughout history and today.
I search in vain for some responsibility, guilt (conscience) and empathy by rich people (let's say income >$50000).

I am poor on purpose and stand with the unheeded vulnerable majority.
Those who are about to die, greet you ;)
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Hefaistos on October 22, 2020, 11:57:43 AM
I believe that Co2 emissions will be cut drastically by 2050 (50-80% from today's levels) and eliminated by 2100.

I believe in unicorns and sparkle ponies.

In my opinion, there is actually no evidence of this being likely to occur.

SH, El Cid talked about emissions, and I believe he is correct in that statement.
 Your graph of CO2 ppm in the atm. shows the state variable, whereas emissions are the flow.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: dnem on October 22, 2020, 01:41:16 PM
IMO emissions are more likely to be low in 2050 due to a collapse of the human endeavor than as a result of any sort of techno-utopian human flourishing.

By 2100 we may have figured out how to live sustainably with a smaller human population.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: blu_ice on October 22, 2020, 01:42:21 PM
I believe that Co2 emissions will be cut drastically by 2050 (50-80% from today's levels) and eliminated by 2100.

I believe in unicorns and sparkle ponies.

In my opinion, there is actually no evidence of this being likely to occur.

SH, El Cid talked about emissions, and I believe he is correct in that statement.
 Your graph of CO2 ppm in the atm. shows the state variable, whereas emissions are the flow.
AFAIK emissions have risen every year until 2020 and Covid. Expecting 50-80% reduction by 2050 is a rather bold statement.

80% reduction by 2050 means appr. 5% yearly decrease, or a drop in emissions similar to the pandemic every single year for the next three decades.

Good luck with that.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Général de GuerreLasse on October 22, 2020, 03:29:10 PM
Farmers across Africa have been regreening the Sahel and reversing desertification for decades.  Crop yields are much higher now than they were in the '80s. 

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/great-green-wall-stop-desertification-not-so-much-180960171/ (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/great-green-wall-stop-desertification-not-so-much-180960171/)

Quote
The Age of Humans
The “Great Green Wall” Didn’t Stop Desertification, but it Evolved Into Something That Might
The multibillion-dollar effort to plant a 4,000-mile-long wall of trees hit some snags along the way, but there’s still hope

By Jim Morrison
smithsonianmag.com
August 23, 2016

It was a simple plan to combat a complex problem. The plan: plant a Great Green Wall of trees 10 miles wide and 4,350 miles long, bisecting a dozen countries from Senegal in the west to Djibouti in the east. The problem: the creeping desertification across Africa.


"We moved the vision of the Great Green Wall from one that was impractical to one that was practical," says Mohamed Bakarr, the lead environmental specialist for Global Environment Facility, the organization that examines the environmental benefit of World Bank projects. "It is not necessarily a physical wall, but rather a mosaic of land use practices that ultimately will meet the expectations of a wall. It has been transformed into a metaphorical thing."

Quote
Reij, now based in Amsterdam, began working in the Sahel when the soil literally was blowing away during dust storms. After years away, Reij returned to Niger and Burkina Faso in the summer of 2004. He was stunned by what he saw, green where there had been nothing but tan, denuded land. He quickly secured funding for the first of several studies looking at farming in villages throughout Burkina Faso and Niger.


[/quote]

Thanks Ken. Love reading about things like this.

Good, my dear friends, because I consider you as my friends (as well as El Cid and many others).I always enjoy reading your posts on the evolution of the ice pack and global warming. But here, as with the ice pack, you should look at the real world numbers and not the dubious media-interest verbiage.
So here are some links to serious sites, unfortunately in French, but of which I propose you some translations. We will study here the case of Niger.

Conclusion: Productive Resources
limited and high vulnerability
Two thirds of Niger's surface area is
and only 11% of the land is desert and only 11% of the
suitable for agriculture. The soils are in
the poor as a whole and deteriorate over the course of the
time, due to water and wind erosion,
human and animal pressure, the
rapid progression of desertification (75% of the
territory) and climatic aridity (89% of the
territory).
The irrigable potential is largely under
exploited. Only one third of irrigable land is
annually developed. Agriculture
Nigerien is essentially based on the
rainfed production. However, the yields are
and declining over the long term, for
the main crops.
The increase in production comes from
mainly an increase in surface areas
cultivated. This is no longer done as in the past
on agricultural reserves, but on the land
sylvo-pastoral and forestry. The strong
population growth and weakness
of modernization investments in the
agricultural sector are contributing to the acceleration of
this phenomenon.
The extension of cultivated areas and
the increase in production did not result in
a reversal of the imbalance trend
and food dependency. The
agricultural production remains structurally
lower than the national demand. The deficit is
filled by imports which represented
up to 40% of national needs. The aid
only meets 1% of the needs
cereal crops (3% in 2004/05).
https://www.oecd.org/fr/pays/niger/41642919.pdf

Niger is the poorest state in Africa, located at the 188th
rank of
the HDI 20143
The company is in last position worldwide. The primary sector dominates
the country's economy, which depends to a very large extent on foreign aid to the
development. A Niger that was self-sufficient in foodstuffs and even
exporter of cereals until the end of the sixties, became strongly in deficit.
The country has nearly 20 million inhabitants in 2016, while it had 10 million
around the year 2000, and 3 million at independence (1960). With a fertility rate
of 7.6 children per woman4 - a world record - and despite a particularly high rate of
high under-five mortality (127 per 1,000 in 2015);5
) the population
is still expected to grow considerably to reach 72 million in 20506.
.
Moreover, the share of the population under 15 years of age already exceeds 50% of the population.
population7 since 2015 and this rate is therefore expected to increase further with the growth in
global demographics.
One of the major challenges for the government of Niger and its technical and
financial resources for the years to come will therefore be to be able to satisfy this new demand.
food. This is all the more so as this demand is currently already difficult to meet.
satisfied8
Approximately 6 out of 10 households can cover their food needs for only 3 months.
. Food and nutritional security (FNS) thus remains a challenge today.
important in Niger, in its four dimensions: availability, access, use and stability.

The geographical location of Nigerle is subject to severe climatic conditions that
strongly constrain its agricultural production and its ability to meet the needs of its customers.
of its population. Niger is indeed in one of the hottest regions in the world.
of the globe. In the North, 3/5ths of the country are in the Saharan zone. In terms of
hydrographic, Niger has only one permanent river: the Niger River. If
Niger's groundwater resources are quite significant10 , these are
difficult to use, thus limiting the possibility of irrigation.
Thus, not only is the range of crops available for cultivation relatively limited, but also the
regular droughts also have a direct impact on the harvesting of products.
keys. In recent years, the country has indeed experienced a food crisis (cereal deficit).
every two or three years11 , thus threatening the food security of the populations.
The silting up of river beds, erosion, invasions by predators, locusts, etc. are all factors that threaten the food security of populations.
and epidemics such as meningitis, measles or cholera, also affect safety
the country's food supply.
Beyond that, global warming at the global level is accentuating this situation.
already critical, by intensifying drought episodes (rainfall deficits) as well as by
flooding, thus reducing arable land.
https://www.alimenterre.org/system/files/2019-06/1090-notes-techniques-afd-niamey.pdf

In addition, nearly 82.6% of the population lives in rural areas and are mainly farmers from
rural subsistence farmers, who depend on rain-fed agriculture as their main source of food and income. The
continuation of extensive and unproductive practices in the agro-sylvo-pastoral sector, which is subject to strong constraints
of land use, leads to fragmentation of farms and increasing resource degradation
natural. Small farms - the average farm size is 5 ha for
about twelve (12) people - are increasingly dominant. They employ the strength of non
paid. These small farms are very fragmented due to population growth and inheritance law.
current.

Instability in neighboring countries (notably Mali, Libya and Nigeria), as well as internal conflicts in some of these countries.
regions of Niger, periodic droughts and floods, and the creation of the ECOWAS Free Movement Zone.
are all factors that determine the migratory movements that affect Niger. Migrants from
ECOWAS countries enjoy freedom of movement and enter Niger legally. Nigerien authorities
are powerless to send back migrants from ECOWAS countries who try to enter illegally into the country.
Libya. In the absence of opportunities for voluntary return, many remain stranded in Niger with no choice but to try to return.
to earn enough money to pay for the continuation of the trip. For more than 90% of the migrants assisted by IOM
(Nigeriens and other nationalities), the desire to improve their living conditions and to seek better
professional opportunities is the main reason for their decision to migrate. Although Niger is considered
relatively stable, population displacements and the continued growth of migrant "ghettos" in the
migration routes increase the pressure on already limited resources (food and land), and
could pose a threat to the fragile security balance in the north of the country.
According to the IOM, Niger is mainly known as a transit country for West African migration flows.
to Libya and Algeria, then for some to the Mediterranean. The country has a Net Migration Rate of -0.3 migrants/
1,000 population during the period 2015-2020. The IOM assessment shows that migrants are generally of
young men who emigrate for economic reasons from Senegal, Nigeria, Gambia, and Mali
and other West African countries.
https://www.rvo.nl/sites/default/files/2020/01/Rapport-de-la-mission-de-cadrage-RVO-sur-l-emploi-des-jeunes-dans-les-chaines-de-valeur-agricole-Niger.pdf

So, my friends, let's stop believing that everything is going to be wonderful in these countries. And yes, he already has big problems with locusts during rainy episodes.

Concerning China, one of these days I will have to explain to you that planting trees and planting a resilient forest rich in biodiversity are 2 different things.




Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on October 22, 2020, 08:21:25 PM
Mon General!

I think that the Chinese purposefully planted many types of trees that would help create a true ecosystem (and it did create that ecosystem in fact!).
Noone nowadays plants forests* with just one species exactly because we now know that it will never be an ecosystem. I know. I plant trees :)

*by forest I mean forest, not industrial plantations (short rotation coppice willow or poplar, etc) of course which are not forests
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: kassy on October 23, 2020, 06:05:30 PM
So, my friends, let's stop believing that everything is going to be wonderful in these countries.
No one said that. It was just an example of one nice project.

Aside. A while ago many billions were pledged (for Paris i guess) by the rich countries to help the poorer ones with the climate transition and they ended up with 20 or 30 billion out of 140.

So much could be done with that also at very basic levels...
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on October 23, 2020, 07:47:56 PM
I believe that Co2 emissions will be cut drastically by 2050 (50-80% from today's levels) and eliminated by 2100.

I believe in unicorns and sparkle ponies.

In my opinion, there is actually no evidence of this being likely to occur.

SH, El Cid talked about emissions, and I believe he is correct in that statement.
 Your graph of CO2 ppm in the atm. shows the state variable, whereas emissions are the flow.

Yes. I understand. I simply have less confidence in the accuracy of global emissions data as I do not know how it is calculated. I have far more confidence in a single measure, using a fixed technique.

Do you have a go to site for the global emissions metric?
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: El Cid on October 23, 2020, 09:18:19 PM
I simply have less confidence in the accuracy of global emissions data as I do not know how it is calculated. I have far more confidence in a single measure, using a fixed technique.

Still Co2 levels show stock, emissions show flow. The change in Co2 levels shows something closer to the annual emission numbers (although likely with a lag). Besides, I was talking about the future path of emissions.
Title: Re: Places becoming more livable
Post by: Shared Humanity on October 23, 2020, 09:33:48 PM
I simply have less confidence in the accuracy of global emissions data as I do not know how it is calculated. I have far more confidence in a single measure, using a fixed technique.

Still Co2 levels show stock, emissions show flow. The change in Co2 levels shows something closer to the annual emission numbers (although likely with a lag). Besides, I was talking about the future path of emissions.

Where do you draw your emissions data?