Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Paddy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13
1
Arctic sea ice / Re: September predictions challenge 2020
« on: Today at 08:44:10 AM »
June predictions:
JAXA: 3.75 to 4.25 (Medium confidence)
PIOMAS: 4 to 4.5 (Medium confidence)
NSIDC: 4.25 to 4.75 (Medium confidence)

...
July predictions:
JAXA: 3.5 to 4.0 (Medium confidence)
PIOMAS: 3.75 to 4.25 (Medium confidence)
NSIDC: 4.0 to 4.5 (Medium confidence)

August predictions:
JAXA: 3.5 to 4.0 (High confidence)
PIOMAS: 3.75 to 4.25 (High confidence)
NSIDC: 3.75 to 4.25 (High confidence)

I'm not actually at all high in confidence, but thar's the way this game is scored.

Already thinking I went too low here. Oh well, should have waited.

2
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: Today at 08:40:03 AM »
[ADS NIPR VISHOP (JAXA)] Arctic Sea Ice Extent.

August 6th, 2020:
     5,489,054 km2, a drop of -13,014 km2.
     2020 is still the lowest on record.
     Highlighted 2020 & the 4 years with a daily lowest min in Sept. (2012, 2019, 2016 & 2007).
     In the graph are today's 10 lowest years.
     Source: https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent

I am working on table and graph.

I think this is going to be the last small drop for a while.

I expect 60-85K drops for the next 10 days maybe longer coming up.

Personslly, I expect this is the end of drawing on new bits of the graph paper until after the minimum.

3
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: August 03, 2020, 12:46:04 PM »
Fully agree Blum. The final straw is Trump wanting to “postpone” the election AND questioning the integrity of the electoral process which may lead to all sorts of mayhem should he lose. Is Trump going to concede a loss in November? How about his supporters? Trump truly ticks lot of boxes on the fascist inquiry.

Even more worryingly, fascism is also gaining ground on other major nations. Putin’s Russia and Erdogan’s Turkey tick every single box. India is not far behind. Neither is Brazil. In the EU we have Hungary and Poland & many large populist/fascist parties in other member states.

Trump needs to lose so thoroughly and completely that he's left without a leg to stand on.  The funny thing is, delay (even if it was possible, which seems unlikely) really isn't in his electoral interests. Young people coming of age to vote are thoroughly turned off to him and his mesage, as has been commented on; and the coming post-COVID recession isn't likely to boost his chances either.

4
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: August 03, 2020, 12:34:57 PM »
Well, even those numbers depend on how they register COVID deaths; If I have covid and die because of cardiac arrest; Is that counted as a COVID death? And did I die because of COVID? I could have had the cardiac arrest even if I didn't have COVID; Or not.

Or if I lose my job because of COVID and I can't afford health care anymore and die because of a cardiac arrest, but don't have COVID, is that a COVID death or not?

So even those statistics are multi interpretable, unfortunately;

They are indeed multi-interpretable, but on the whole, I'd expect the confirmed COVID death figure to be an undercount. Definitions vary by country, but are generally dependent on having had a positive test, and a lot of people are reckoned to have died from COVID without ever having had a test, particularly earlier on in the pandemic and in lower resource settings.

5
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: August 03, 2020, 09:31:35 AM »
I'm curious. If I say that I believe that the IFR for SARS-CoV-2 is at the most 0.2%, unless there are factors like pollution and low population health at play, does that make me a 'virus denier'?

You'd not be far off the median figure from this recent meta-analysis of 0.27% (although observed IFRs varied massively depending on population age structure etc, from 0.00% to 1.63%)
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.13.20101253v3

But if this is your "at most" estimate, what is your own midrange estimate, and why?

Personally, my midrange estimate for the global population would be about 0.25%, but I'm very confident it would be above 0.05% and below 1.5%. 

EDIT: I'd also say we can be absolutely sure that it's above 0.009%, since that's the proportion of the world's population confirmed to have died from COVID so far. It's very likely also above 0.179%, since that's the highest nation or statewide confirmed COVID mortality as a share of the total population so far [seen in New Jersey], and obviously not everyone in New Jersey will have caught it, and some of the existing New Jersey cases will be yet to die from it.Possibly I should revise my estimates upwards... maybe to 0.18% for the low end, 0.5% for the midrange and 1.8% for the high end.

6
Statistical musings: what will the impact of COVID be on global life expectancy in 2020?

As things stood pre-COVID, global life expectancy was 73. We were seeing about 58 million deaths per year, half of them in people under 73, half in older.

If COVID causes a million excess deaths worldwide, and half a million of them are in people under the age of 73... it probably won't damage global life expectancy very perceptibly. Maybe we'll see a bit of a dip in countries with a relatively high life expectancy and a relatively high death toll (such as the UK, Spain,  Belgium, Chile, USA etc).

But if we see 10 million excess deaths this year, the additional 5 million or so people dying younger than 73 may well pull the global figure down a little, with rather more noticeable drops among countries that both have a high pre-COVID life expectancy and a high death toll.

Hopefully, a vaccine should significantly reduce global direct COVID mortality from 2021 onwards. But then we have the economic consequences of this situation, which may have a more lasting impact.

7
Arctic sea ice / Re: September predictions challenge 2020
« on: August 02, 2020, 04:43:18 PM »
June predictions:
JAXA: 3.75 to 4.25 (Medium confidence)
PIOMAS: 4 to 4.5 (Medium confidence)
NSIDC: 4.25 to 4.75 (Medium confidence)

...
July predictions:
JAXA: 3.5 to 4.0 (Medium confidence)
PIOMAS: 3.75 to 4.25 (Medium confidence)
NSIDC: 4.0 to 4.5 (Medium confidence)

August predictions:
JAXA: 3.5 to 4.0 (High confidence)
PIOMAS: 3.75 to 4.25 (High confidence)
NSIDC: 3.75 to 4.25 (High confidence)

I'm not actually at all high in confidence, but thar's the way this game is scored.

8
The politics / Re: Elections 2020 USA
« on: July 30, 2020, 06:43:32 PM »
b, I know Biden will not be prolife. If a million Americans a year were dying of heatstroke AGW would be the deciding issue. If a million Americans a year were dying of COVID that would be the deciding issue. But a million Americans a year are dying of abortion. Tell me what candidate I should vote for then.

Well, depending on state, there may be the option of voting Kanye. 

What a choice between him and Trump, if this is your number one issue... and incidentally, if it is your number one issue, you may want to be aware that some of his policies, allegedly designed to prevent abortions, have the paradoxical effect of increasing abortion numbers by reducing access to contraception.  https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/internationaldevelopment/2019/01/16/trumps-reinstatement-and-expansion-of-the-global-gag-rule-has-harmful-effects-for-women-men-and-children/

9
Arctic sea ice / Re: 365 day average extent poll
« on: July 30, 2020, 01:55:15 PM »
JAXA Arctic Sea Ice Extent - 365 day trailing Average
Data as 20 July


The current high daily extent losses maintain the possibility of a record 365-day low in September.
For a record low in 2020, the average daily reduction has to be 709 km2, i.e. 2020 extent needs to be on average at least 259 k below 2019 extent.

On this day, the 20th July, 2020 is 642k less than 2019. So there is currently considerable leeway for a record low this year. But........

With the gap between 2019 and 2020 having shrunk to just 245k, I suppose this looks a tad more touch and go now... although of course we're getting to the point in the year when 2019's own sea ice loss slowed down.  Everything's still to play for.

10
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: July 30, 2020, 11:21:11 AM »
The life expectancy dip from this in some of the harder-hit, high life expectancy countries, such as the USA, UK, and Spain is going to be interesting. For instance, I expect there'll be more than 3 million deaths in the USA this year (up from 2.84 million in 2018, or 2.81 million in 2017). But how many more than 3 million there will be, and how many of those deaths will be among people under the age of 79, are still very much open questions.

11
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 28, 2020, 06:16:43 PM »
Give it a year and see where we are the future is quite Appocalyptic IMHO, Pandemic, Great Depression. Wars, Famine, Civil War, Climate Crisis, Presidential election, Brexit. We never recovered from the 2008 Crash and now the SHTF.

Everything on that list bar the climate crisis has happened before in one or another more drastic form than we are seeing today. 2020 is a shit year, certainly, but not the end times.

EDIT: As a case in point, see the life expectancy stats: globally they've been steadily rising, up to 73 at present, from a global average of 47 in 1950. No country on earth has a life expectancy even close to that low today; in every country, life is more safe and secure than was the global norm a single lifetime ago.  These aren't the dying times yet.

12
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 28, 2020, 05:18:29 PM »
I like this quote by Terence Mckenna

“The apocalypse is not something which is coming. The apocalypse has arrived in major portions of the planet and it’s only because we live within a bubble of incredible privilege and social insulation that we still have the luxury of anticipating the apocalypse.”

The apocalypse? People today are living longer than they ecer did before. (Which is a large part of the problem, so far as population growth is concerned, although the ethical solution is obviously to have fewer babies rather than to cull the living).

13
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 28, 2020, 09:41:25 AM »
DMI north of 80N temperature and GFS 3-day average wind. Both look unusual.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to call DMI 80N all that unusual.  If it keeps rising, maybe.

14
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 27, 2020, 02:25:58 PM »
The problem with when the population of the World is falling we will not know about it.

New York, Covid-19 deaths 32,688. Population 8.3 Million

China, 4.634 deaths. Population 1.4 Billion

India similar massive population but not telling the real story, as countries for Economic and Political reasons are hiding the Truth.

Do you really think they're hiding 80 million deaths, however?  Because that's how many would be required in a year to reverse growth within that one year.

Overall, I doubt COVID is going to affect population growth much at all.  We're probably looking at fewer than 5 million excess deaths worldwide this year, most of them beyond childbearing age, and a likely mini baby boom of a few million courtesy of lockdown.  And at some point next year we should get a vaccine.

One easy solution is to not worry about it on a daily basis. These are long term trends so no rush.

This is a key part of why it goes unaddressed - like climate change, the impacts of acting to address demographic issues around population aren't really seen on the less than 5 year timescale that would be required for political decisions.

15
Its getting close to 50 days from the minimum and Slater's method is saying 4.39 for Sept 11th, which doesn't bode well for a first or second place finish. I'm taking the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and all the rest bin.

Interesting - why do you think the Slater model is predicting less melt to come this year than was yet to come on the same day in any of the last ten?

16
Arctic sea ice / Re: When will the Northwest Passage "open" in 2020?
« on: July 26, 2020, 09:25:37 PM »
I voted for early August due to all the high temperatures in the CAA right now but honestly I have no idea.

17
Just a quick and dirty poll to keep people entertained until the August polls open up.

18
Arctic sea ice / Re: The 2020 melting season
« on: July 23, 2020, 01:02:16 PM »
I fear for the Beaufort and surrounding seas;

Based on the worldview area measurement I did I think there is between 1.1M and 1.3M ice; Clouds make it more diffcult to have a good line :(

And seeing how bad the ice appears to be and how fast other parts of the arctic just disappeared/melted out, I won't be suprised if a large part of it will melt out in the next 2 weeks;

And given that the Beaufort is one of the few areas with above average extent for the time of year compared to recent years, i.e. with a lot of extent to lose, this could be one of a few factors that keep extent falling at above average rates for a bit longer.

19
The politics / Re: Brexit...
« on: July 20, 2020, 01:12:24 PM »
People who voted to have their face eaten by leopards now protest that their face is being eaten by leopards.

They were conned by dishonest people who appealed to their patriotism re "control of our borders" etc and/or promising a goldilocks Brexit where we'd somehow get a better deal out than in and/or predicting the total collapse of the EU based on the struggles of the Greek and Italian economies.

They were conned. The challenge was and is to convince them of that without alienating them further / further dividing the country. It's not been easy, however, due to confirmation bias etc.

20
Arctic sea ice / Re: 365 day average extent poll
« on: July 18, 2020, 04:53:24 PM »
Quote from: gerontocrat
IFF 2020 extent continues below 2019 by the same amount as on the 16th July, the new record low would occur on the 29th September 2020.
[/quote

Great analysis and figures as always, even if this does seem like a pretty big IF.

I'd personally reckon a new 365-day low may be most likely in early 2021, now (when 2020 ice cover was high). But obviously there's a lot that can change between now and then.

21
The politics / Re: Brexit...
« on: July 18, 2020, 09:59:24 AM »
 It is all very predictably disastrous, yes.

22
The politics / Re: Your 2020 US Presidential Election Map
« on: July 17, 2020, 07:54:48 PM »
the guy who backs white supremacists.

The biggest falsehood in America right now. "But that's what my favorite "News" outlet told me".

I'm not even in America. This is worldwide knowledge.

23
The politics / Re: Your 2020 US Presidential Election Map
« on: July 17, 2020, 07:04:58 PM »
If your best argument in favour of Trump is that he's marginally (3 years) the younger septuagenarian, you haven't got much of an argument.  Especially not when trying to make the comparison on racism when you're backing the guy who backs white supremacists.

24
The politics / Re: Your 2020 US Presidential Election Map
« on: July 17, 2020, 06:38:37 PM »
We're heading toward LBJ / Goldwater territory.

We can only hope

25
Arctic sea ice / Re: 365 day average extent poll
« on: July 17, 2020, 10:02:15 AM »
I think that to get a new record low in 365-day extent will require a poor refreeze season (as we had in 2016/17). It will not be enough to have a low Sep minimum, as 2020 was rather high during winter, though I haven't run the numbers to back this up.

You're probably right.  Right now, for each day that extent stays 600k km2 lower than the same date in 2019, the 365 day average will be dropping by over 1600 km2, and 2020 has been somewhat below 2019 since late May.  However, the 365 day average would have been climbing slowly from January to May, when 2020 was either tied with 2019 or above it, so we won't be down to the mini-trough in annual average in December 2019 yet, never mind getting anywhere close to threatening the record.

26
Arctic sea ice / Re: 365 day average extent poll
« on: July 17, 2020, 06:55:16 AM »
How is this metric looking at present, gerontocrat? Seems like the last six months will have been very up and down.

27
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 16, 2020, 07:28:54 PM »
Another casual prediction: a decade after peak childbirth there will be a global panic for the lack of babies (=future consumers & taxpayers) with all sorts of birthrate increasing campaigns.

Happing as we speak in Germany and Spain.


While the Germans try to make it look like something else, kind of hidden agenda, the spaniards officially say so.

Also already happened in Japan, South Korea, Russia... lots of countries with sub-replacement fertility are worried that they aren't having enough kids.

28
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 16, 2020, 04:12:29 PM »
I think you need to research the situation in India a little more before you forecast that 40% of the Indian population are going to be killed by a massive drought in the next decade.

Anyway, here's a lighter, casual prediction: Peak total childbirth globally will be seen in either 2020 or 2021. We were already on a highest-ever plateau at about 141 million children per year, and forecast to slowly fall; with a few million extra lockdown babies in late 2020 / early 2021 around the world, these might well be the highest years ever for this metric before the drop that's been forecast.

29
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 15, 2020, 11:28:11 AM »
However, I'm willing to bet global population doesn't peak in the 2020s.  If you and I are still on this forum in 2030 and the world's population hasn't peaked, would you be willing to give 10 US dollars to a charity of my choice, if I promise in return to give 10 US dollars to a charity of your choice if it has?

I think the world would be in heaps of trouble by 2030, so there would be greater things to worry about than some bets. And the likelihood of me being on the forums by that time isn't particularly high either, I think.

Fair enough.  Just consider for a second how many people were predicting doom back in 2010.  Things are getting a tad worse on a range of fronts worldwide, but population continues to trend upwards by 80 million per year.  And many ways in which it could get worse will actually drive childbirth rates up, rather than down - people in insecure circumstances tend to have more kids rather than less.

30
Consequences / Re: Population: Public Enemy No. 1
« on: July 15, 2020, 09:54:35 AM »
People often argue, what is the biggest problem, but I'd say everything is. Both overpopulation and overconsumption are a problem. Both developing countries (overpopulation) and developed countries (overconsumption) have a problem in their hands with regards to degrading environment and resource depletion. Every born person consumes, however rich people consume way more than poor people.

In any case, I have to admit I have found the UN projections amusing. They are so out of touch with climate projections and realities that it isn't even funny. And it's not just that, they don't take into account resource depletion or any other practical degrading world factor either. There is no way we are going to reach 10B people. I'll go out on a limb and claim that population peaks in the 2020's.

I agree completely on both overpopulation and overconsumption being a problem, and it being necessary to address both.

However, I'm willing to bet global population doesn't peak in the 2020s.  If you and I are still on this forum in 2030 and the world's population hasn't peaked, would you be willing to give 10 US dollars to a charity of my choice, if I promise in return to give 10 US dollars to a charity of your choice if it has?

...their study, published in the Lancet, projects it will fall below 1.7 by 2100. ...

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53409521

It's frankly silly to try to predict the fertility rate in 2100.  To put it in perspective, it's approximately as silly as trying to predict the fertility rate in 2020 based on the global situation in 1940; either is making a forecast over an 80 year time gap.  (Or slightly more, as we don't actually have figures for 2020 itself yet).  There's such a thing as trying to extrapolate too far beyond your data.

31
The politics / Re: Your 2020 US Presidential Election Map
« on: July 14, 2020, 03:05:17 PM »

In any case, I think Kanye is going to pull in 1-2% of Trump supporters nationally, and 5-10% of Biden supporters.

Wishful thinking on the Kanye impact.

Currently West is polling at 2% of the vote, vs 48% for Biden and 39% for Trump.  If he's not included in the poll, the polling splits 48% for Biden vs 40% for Trump, so if anything he may be taking more votes from Trump than Biden. 

In any event, he's probably going to be irrelevant.  Most people who are politically minded enough to vote will go for the candidate from one of the big two parties, as always.

32
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: July 14, 2020, 01:30:18 PM »
This thread started with a poll.

Should it be resurrected? Mind you, last time the USA got Trump. Those of a superstitious leaning might not want to tempt fate a second time.

Feel free to resurrect the poll if you like.  I for one am not superstitious.  (What's one more poll?)  I do feel, however, that on this forum the general outcome is hardly in doubt.


33
The politics / Re: Brexit...
« on: July 08, 2020, 02:47:48 PM »
Sanctions only if the treaty was unlawfully broken, otherwise a return to wto style trade and repayments for the money already engaged, which is normal after breaking a contract, not equal to just withholding someone's sovereign money on a basis that is not legal under international law, it would have been if sanctions had been voted prior, but alas

What treaty are you referring to?  There have been escalating EU sanctions in place since 2017: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/venezuela/

Also, as the originally linked Al Jazeera article pointed out, the issue is that there are two opposing figures both claiming the title of president of Venezuela, and they are asking for opposite things to be done with that money.  And since the British gvt (like every EU gvt, among many others) does not recognise Maduro as president of Venezuela, the judiciary aren't going to give him Venezuela's money.

34
The politics / Re: Brexit...
« on: July 08, 2020, 12:31:03 PM »
Paddy, i'm an anti-interventionist in this case. I'm aware some nations 'don't recognize' the democratic election results but i don't recognize their non-recognition. ;)

Britain withholding this money is arbitrary; a mallicious act. I really don't think stealing is too much of a strong wording. But i regress it if you feel uncomfortable with it. The news is out there, everyone can make up their own mind.

The fact that we're arguing about this sanction on a thread about Brexit when sanctions were explicitly called for by the European Parliament among others is rather amusing :-)

Here's a map of which countries do and don't recognise the results of this less than democratic election, btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2018_Venezuelan_presidential_election_recognition_map.svg

35
The politics / Re: Brexit...
« on: July 08, 2020, 12:08:23 PM »
Sorry, Paddy, but i can't make a logical connection to why the homicide rate in any given country would be grounds for withholding (stealing? semantics?) money.

The issue is that the legitimacy of the current administration in Venezuela is in doubt.  See here for more of the dubiousness at the last election: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Venezuelan_presidential_election

Extrajudicial killings by death squads to suppress opposition is part of that story: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-security-un/killings-torture-still-going-on-in-venezuela-u-n-rights-chief-idUSKCN1VU1IB

36
The politics / Re: The Trump Presidency
« on: July 08, 2020, 11:25:02 AM »
Polling from a divided country:

Trump's overall approval sits at 38%, 3% above his lowest on record of 35%, and 8% lower than in Jan to May this year.  And there's a massive partisan gap within these figures - his approval stats among Republican voters sit at 91%, vs 33% among Independent voters and 2% among Democrat voters.  "The current 89-point difference between Republicans' and Democrats' ratings of Trump is the largest partisan gap Gallup has ever measured for a presidential approval rating in a single survey."

https://news.gallup.com/poll/313454/trump-job-approval-rating-steady-lower-level.aspx

37
The politics / Re: Brexit...
« on: July 08, 2020, 11:11:00 AM »
@Blumenkraft,

I'm no fan of Brexit nor the current UK administration, but the gold isn't being taken for use by Britain.  It's a frozen account, not a stolen one.

And speaking of administrations that I'm not a fan of, did you know that Venezuela has the highest rate of homicide by security forces in the world ?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_by_country

38
Arctic sea ice / Re: September predictions challenge 2020
« on: July 05, 2020, 08:23:43 AM »
I don't know. The distribution of the ice, with such low amounts in the central seas and such high amounts in the peripheral seas, suggests that a lot will melt out in my very humble total guess of an opinion. Taking all my predictions down half a bin, but sticking to Medium.

July predictions:
JAXA: 3.5 to 4.0 (Medium confidence)
PIOMAS: 3.75 to 4.25 (Medium confidence)
NSIDC: 4.0 to 4.5 (Medium confidence)

39
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: June 28, 2020, 08:28:34 AM »
Covid cases worldwide have passed 10 million, and deaths have passed 500 thousand: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Probably Covid deaths will pass 1m before the end of the year, meaning exactly one punter will have got their prediction right, despite all the advances made with Remdesivir, dexamethasone, convalescent plasma, increased ITU capacity etc., since the daily worldwide death rate has been pretty constant around 5k per day for the last two months, and there are 187 days till the end of the year.

Given the rest of the 2020s are yet to come, and that this isn't covering the indirect deaths... but also that at some time in 2021 we should hopefully have a vaccine, I'd reckon either the 1m to 10m or the 10m to 100m bin is likely to be the correct one.



40
Arctic sea ice / Re: September predictions challenge 2020
« on: June 10, 2020, 09:04:31 AM »
June predictions:
JAXA: 3.75 to 4.25 (Medium confidence)
PIOMAS: 4 to 4.5 (Medium confidence)
NSIDC: 4.25 to 4.75 (Medium confidence)

41
Going for "between 4.25 and 4.75", which has been a frequent bracket across previous years

42
Alright, binntho has convinced me - going for the 3.75 to 4.25 bracket as well

43
 May 1st 12:00 GMT

44
Policy and solutions / Re: Cars, cars and more cars Part Deux
« on: April 03, 2020, 05:49:33 PM »
Are any car companies likely to go bust courtesy of this outbreak?  New car sales must have dropped massively all over the world...

45
Policy and solutions / Re: Lessons from COVID-19
« on: April 03, 2020, 05:47:10 PM »
One thing that I expect will happen from this at an individual level is that a lot more people will start to maintain a store of long lasting goods that they need at home, so that they don't end up out of pasta / tinned tomatoes / toilet roll / whatever the next time there's a crisis.

I also wonder if fewer people will want to board a cruise ship, after the various plague ship occurrences we've been seeing with this.

On a medical level, it's possible we may identify some new broad-spectrum antiviral treatments.  We'll certainly be able to rule out a lot of candidates for such treatment, given the number of trials under way.  And I'd imagine the world's intensive care capacity may get a significant upgrade.

On a systematic level of how the world runs?  Many countries may be a little quicker to respond the next time a new infection shows similar behaviour.  But remember that there have been a lot of false alarms and contained situations while waiting for the next viral pandemic, and there will be a lot more to come after this... which will likely wear down responsiveness all over again, over time.

46
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: April 03, 2020, 05:36:28 PM »
Does the fact the western european countries are in the 'top' with deaths/million say something about how bad we are reacting on the virus or how bad the statistics in other countries are?

A little of both, plus a few other factors. 

Western European countries have generally been hit harder than East Asian countries, which may be partly attributable to the SARS experience in East Asia previously, and general precautionary attitude maintained by much of the population with regards to respiratory infections, e.g. widespread wearing of masks etc.  Some Western European countries may have been particularly complacent (e.g. the UK). 

As for the stats, there may also be some dodgy stats from China, but Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea all genuinely seem to have escaped the worst of this and kept such outbreaks as they have had under control.

A particularly vulnerability of Western European countries to this has lain in many having generally high population density + old populations + lots of airport links with the rest of the world, which is not so much a matter of a bad reaction as just bad luck in this regard.

Then, of course, you have other countries whose outbreaks are just getting going now.  We don't know how bad things are going to get in the USA, Russia, or Brazil, for example, but there seem to be issues in the response in all these countries... and a fair few factors to suggest it's going to get pretty bad. 

I imagine future epidemiologists will pore all over the data in months and years to come.  And many historians and political pundits will argue the toss over the justifiability of different countries' responses.

47
Policy and solutions / Re: Oil and Gas Issues
« on: April 02, 2020, 05:08:48 PM »
Given how much production has been shut down as unprofitable, how soon will production bounce back once demand picks up, as and when we have a vaccine and business goes back more or less to usual?

And will there be slightly less demand than prior to lockdown due to general economic fallout, people having got used to videoconferencing / working from home?  Or more, because many people will have unfinished business to catch up on?

48
Consequences / Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« on: March 30, 2020, 07:28:29 AM »
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-24/countries-are-starting-to-hoard-food-threatening-global-trade

Apparently it's not just individuals, but countries that are stockpiling food.

If this goes on, especially if harvests in western nations are disrupted due to barriers to seasonal migrant workers, the food supply situation could yet get a bit ugly.

49
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: March 18, 2020, 12:33:11 PM »
There's been mutterings on the interwebs about maybe repurposing some small animal ventilators (usually used by vets for managing cats and dogs, but able to cover a respiratory cycle quite adequate for humans, as some dogs are human sized) to manage Covid19 patients.  Not sure where they'll find the staff to manage these - perhaps they'll hire vets and vet nurses for this as well? 

50
Consequences / Re: COVID-19
« on: March 16, 2020, 06:48:44 PM »
^^
Quote from: Paddy
...The USA, however, has them in abundance, at 29.3 per 1000

That would be 29.3 (ICU beds) per 100,000 people according to your source.

Whoops! Corrected that

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 13