Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Poll

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

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

Total Members Voted: 28

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

Author Topic: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures  (Read 8743 times)

Avalonian

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #50 on: January 06, 2018, 03:32:37 PM »
The question is, Paddy, whether there is a stable 'afterwards' for the recovery to happen in, in the near term. The most dire predictions for regional rainfall patterns are pretty inexorable declines: there'll be droughts, and then longer and deeper droughts, and then even worse. That's only in some areas, of course, but then it's also only one factor.

We don't yet know what other effects will come into play, but ocean anoxia is a likely one. Direct heat stress in some tropical areas may also be a major factor in the longer term, and fisheries collapse is a foregone conclusion, as the acidification starts knocking out parts of the food chain. (Jellyfish-based menus will compensate some, but how long before they're replaced by dinoflagellates and cyanobacteria?) The point is that as the conditions get worse, more of the 'doomsday scenarios' are going to start kicking in. Hopefully there will be some positive effects as well, but it's hard to see where they'll come from.

In short, we're not looking at an event, and then back to normal; more likely, we're looking at ever-decreasing circles.

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 195
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #51 on: January 06, 2018, 03:46:23 PM »
I am not convinced of population graphs going up to 2100. Our world changes too much to have any valuable information on more than 5 to 10 years. For example I believe that life expentancy will go down in developped countries because we reach a point were benefits of improved medecine are limited for example by increased pollution, stress... In the USA, life expentancy is already going down.

To reduce growth rate, girls' education and contraception are the most effective ways to work, and they have to be present together. In "developped" countries, harder times usually mean less kids. When "developped" countries want to increase their birth rate, they pass laws to help families. I also believe that having mens taking more care of kids also helps reduce birth rate, but that’s something that is usually achieved through girls’ education.

Going against climate change means acting now, we can’t hope that things will change by themselves even if we feel that we are going the right way. I heard of an interesting concept that a good action has 3 axes that must be in balance : acting, trying to change the context, and making it public. To go back to climate change, it means that you can for example help people reduce their CO2 emission, make pressure on politicians  to improve the laws (CO2 tax...) and inform the press of what you’re doing. The press is not always the best way, but for example buying an EV or organic clothes, making city-trips by train instead of airplane... are also a way to inform people around you that you are acting against climate change.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #52 on: January 06, 2018, 05:47:18 PM »
Quote
I believe that life expentancy will go down in developped countries because we reach a point were benefits of improved medecine are limited for example by increased pollution, stress... In the USA, life expentancy is already going down.

We may be close to maximum life expectancy in much of the developed world.  But don't rule out medical advances pushing the ceiling upwards.  But I don't see that as a problem.  I think birth rates will  continue to fall and we'll see overall decrease in births and will, in a couple of decades, finished the job of lengthening lifespan (aside from new technology).

Pollution will drop, most comes from fossil fuel.  Stress may drop, especially as we further lower the stress of  war.  Medicine will continue to improve.  I see us hitting a cell life lifespan ceiling.

As for the US, the upper age ceiling is not dropping. 

Quote
Age-adjusted death rates decreased for seven of the top 10 leading causes of death: heart disease, cancer, chronic lower respiratory disease, stroke, diabetes, influenza and pneumonia, and kidney disease. The rates increased for unintentional injuries, Alzheimer's disease and suicide.

The problem is that more people are dying when they are younger.  The opioid problem is currently killing a lot of people.  Drug deaths are classified as unintentional injuries.

Quote
To reduce growth rate, girls' education and contraception are the most effective ways to work

Creating jobs for women might be the fastest way to lower birth rates in countries with high birth rates and low development.  If we would take a lot of our labor intensive industry like garment assembly into areas where jobs for women are largely nonexistent we should see a rapid drop in births.

Women who bring money into the house are too valuable as income producers to use them as baby producers.  And women tend to spend their income on educating their children, especially their daughters.

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3365
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 857
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #53 on: January 07, 2018, 02:12:35 PM »
I'm also not at all convinced of the forecast of population collapse through famine etc. Any event so drastic as to kill tens of millions of people will also lead to more births surely after, as people have more kids when and after times are unstable.

I think climate events that could kill tens of millions of first world people are still decades away, unless there is a rapid collapse of the Arctic or other climate weak points. However climate events that kill tens of millions are not necesary for societal collapse. If years like the last three become the new normal, war is soon to follow.  That could undo modern society faster than any other natural event short of a meteor strike. Remember that he who must not be named on this thread has the biggest button.

Climate change is just starting. I'm hoping the changes we are seeing slow down  for the next few years and we get at least 5 years of a climate stability similar to that of the 20th century.  I think that would be sufficient time to recover, rebuild and prepare for the next wave of extremes.

However I don't like our odds. As the globe warms and ice disappears for the rest of our lifetimes, extreme climate events become more likely. That means less time  and space for recovery.

Recovery is key. During the holocene many extreme climate events happened, but they were suficiently separated from each other in both time and space that human society had time to recover, and oportunity to grow.  I think the increase in birth rates and economic growth that can be observed after many catastrophes happen only if the climate allows it. Growth is the default human behaviour, like all life.

While it is true that modern society has a great capacity for sucessful adaptation, planetary climate change is something new.  Not new to the planet, not even new to humans, but new to modern society. New problems might not have easy solutions or solutions at all.

Even if the problems of adaptation can be solved economicaly and without decreasing the birth rate, adapting has a cost. Using human tools we can reduce the cost and maximize gains if adaptation but there is always a cost.

Even if we had the will to face climate change with human tools (knowledge, science, engineering) there will be losses during the process of adaptation, but given the fact that humanity have decided to face climate change like animals, ignoring the long term danger, there is likely to be significant losses. After each one there is a posibility of war and collapse.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19225
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2134
  • Likes Given: 264
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #54 on: January 07, 2018, 04:52:17 PM »
The first image shows the results of World3 model runs about 40-years after Limits to Growth was first published in the 1970's; which shows a normalized peak in population before 2050.

Title: "40 years after Limits to Growth The World3 system dynamics model and its impacts"

http://www.wrforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Limits-to-growth.pdf

The second image shows the UN 2017 projection for world population, indicating a 50% chance of the world population peaking at about 9.8 billion around 2050.  Thus if the normalized World3 model projections are correct, billions of lives could be lost between 2050 and 2100.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19080
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 853
  • Likes Given: 324
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #55 on: January 07, 2018, 05:11:28 PM »
...
... Thus if the normalized World3 model projections are correct, billions of lives could be lost between 2050 and 2100.

But if birth rates plummet, most of these would be “potential lives” lost.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19225
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2134
  • Likes Given: 264
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #56 on: January 08, 2018, 05:48:40 PM »
...
... Thus if the normalized World3 model projections are correct, billions of lives could be lost between 2050 and 2100.

But if birth rates plummet, most of these would be “potential lives” lost.

The first linked article discusses how addicts (as addiction to fossil fuels and modern consumption) use wishful thinking to avoid facing reality; while the second linked article discuss how people with a 'savior complex' can get entangled by the addictive behavior of those that they are trying to 'help' without actually solving any problem at all:

TITLE: "DENIAL, AND WISHFUL THINKING"

https://www.kolmac.com/2017/01/denial-wishful-thinking/

Extract: "“Wishful Drinking” referred to the way alcoholics can, over and over, erroneously believe they can control their drinking.

“Wishful thinking” strikes me as a preferable way to describe what is interfering with my patients’ attempts to recover from their addictions. The result is indeed a distortion of thinking, a misperception of reality, but not one that can be resolved by a clinical interpretation of unconscious material.  Fisher’s phrase, “wishful drinking,” suggests that substances can be used to entirely avoid thinking or feeling."

&
Title: "The Savior Complex"

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-high-functioning-alcoholic/201702/the-savior-complex

Extract: "The problem is that trying to "save" someone does not allow the other individual to take responsibility for his or her own actions and to develop internal motivation.  Therefore, the positive (or negative) changes may only be temporary.

“Humans are addicted to suffering at different levels and to different degrees, and we support each other in maintaining these addictions”""
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #57 on: January 08, 2018, 07:00:33 PM »
"DENIAL, AND WISHFUL THINKING"

"PROBLEM SOLVING"


AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19225
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2134
  • Likes Given: 264
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #58 on: January 08, 2018, 07:18:10 PM »
"DENIAL, AND WISHFUL THINKING"

"PROBLEM SOLVING"

Your case that humanity is solving the climate change problem would be more believable if atmospheric GHG concentrations weren't still accelerating. 
« Last Edit: January 08, 2018, 07:28:58 PM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #59 on: January 08, 2018, 08:25:08 PM »
Quote
Your case that humanity is solving the climate change problem would be more believable if atmospheric GHG concentrations weren't still accelerating.

Try paying attention to what is happening at ground level. 

It will take some time to see the results at the atmospheric level.

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10865
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4028
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #60 on: January 08, 2018, 08:33:12 PM »
Quote
Your case that humanity is solving the climate change problem would be more believable if atmospheric GHG concentrations weren't still accelerating.

Try paying attention to what is happening at ground level. 

It will take some time to see the results at the atmospheric level.
At ground level, in 2017 CO2 emissions are estimated to have increased by 2%.
At ground level, in 2017 US oil and gas companies secured US $ 75 billion in new capital to expand operations.
At ground level, in 2017 weather disasters cost the US some $ 300 + billion.

Quote
It will take some time
  - how much time have we got ?

A close run thing


"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #61 on: January 08, 2018, 08:58:56 PM »
We've already run out of time to prevent climate change damage.  The issue now is how well can we minimize the extent of the damage yet to come.

Attend to the amount of renewable energy capacity that is being added and how the rate of addition is accelerating.

Attend to the progress we are making toward affordable low carbon vehicles available for petroleum fueled vehicle replacement.

In order to reduce CO2 emissions we have to:

1) Find acceptable alternatives for fossil fuels.

2) Make those alternatives affordable/acceptable.

3) Install.

We've only recently taken care of number one.  We're about halfway there on number two.  We're just getting started on number three.

Probably the most productive thing those concerned about climate change can do is to push 'installation'.  Do anything you can to increase the amount of renewable energy capacity the world has and do anything you can to move the world from FF-vehicles to e-vehicles.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 895
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #62 on: January 08, 2018, 09:51:23 PM »
We've already run out of time to prevent climate change damage.  The issue now is how well can we minimize the extent of the damage yet to come.

Attend to the amount of renewable energy capacity that is being added and how the rate of addition is accelerating.

Attend to the progress we are making toward affordable low carbon vehicles available for petroleum fueled vehicle replacement.

In order to reduce CO2 emissions we have to:

1) Find acceptable alternatives for fossil fuels.

2) Make those alternatives affordable/acceptable.

3) Install.

We've only recently taken care of number one.  We're about halfway there on number two.  We're just getting started on number three.

Probably the most productive thing those concerned about climate change can do is to push 'installation'.  Do anything you can to increase the amount of renewable energy capacity the world has and do anything you can to move the world from FF-vehicles to e-vehicles.




 4) Begin to use fewer GHG producing fuels.


We've been adding renewables even as we continue to increase FF usage. This is still a road to disaster.
Building and selling a million EVs won't do a thing for us if in the same period we've increased the number of ICEs on the road.


We don't need more EVs, we need fewer ICEs.
Terry


AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19225
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2134
  • Likes Given: 264
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #63 on: January 09, 2018, 01:08:42 AM »
We don't need more EVs, we need fewer ICEs.
Terry

Unfortunately, humanity has been formally committed to that goal since the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and we have not made much progress in that time.  Also, per Brown & Calderia (2017) ECS is currently at least 3.7C rather than the 3C that most carbon budgets are roughly based on.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #64 on: January 09, 2018, 02:26:55 AM »
We don't need more EVs, we need fewer ICEs.
Terry

Unfortunately, humanity has been formally committed to that goal since the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and we have not made much progress in that time.  Also, per Brown & Calderia (2017) ECS is currently at least 3.7C rather than the 3C that most carbon budgets are roughly based on.

What sort of success would you expect when there were essentially no adequate replacements for ICEVs?


AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19225
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2134
  • Likes Given: 264
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #65 on: January 09, 2018, 02:53:57 AM »
We don't need more EVs, we need fewer ICEs.

Unfortunately, humanity has been formally committed to that goal since the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and we have not made much progress in that time.  Also, per Brown & Calderia (2017) ECS is currently at least 3.7C rather than the 3C that most carbon budgets are roughly based on.

What sort of success would you expect when there were essentially no adequate replacements for ICEVs?

While I am not an expert on this matter, off the top of my head technologies that could have been implemented in 1997 onward would include:
- Smaller cars (and/or more fuel efficient cars),
- Ridesharing/carpooling
- Increased mass transit
- Selected use of natural gas fueled trucks, buses and ships
- Improved maintenance plans (say cooperatives) to keep ICEs operating close to peak efficiency
- Distributed work plans in order to reduce commutes
- Increased taxes on most consumables (even if it slowed GDP growth), including agribusiness
- Improved bike lanes/facilities in cities (including communal bike programs)
- Increase advertising budgets to promote 'sustainable' activities and decreased advertising that promote increased consumption
- Increased research budgets for energy efficiency
- Increased regulations on emissions.
etc.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 04:11:06 AM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #66 on: January 09, 2018, 06:19:10 AM »
We don't need more EVs, we need fewer ICEs.

Unfortunately, humanity has been formally committed to that goal since the 1997 Kyoto Protocol and we have not made much progress in that time.  Also, per Brown & Calderia (2017) ECS is currently at least 3.7C rather than the 3C that most carbon budgets are roughly based on.

What sort of success would you expect when there were essentially no adequate replacements for ICEVs?

While I am not an expert on this matter, off the top of my head technologies that could have been implemented in 1997 onward would include:
- Smaller cars (and/or more fuel efficient cars),
- Ridesharing/carpooling
- Increased mass transit
- Selected use of natural gas fueled trucks, buses and ships
- Improved maintenance plans (say cooperatives) to keep ICEs operating close to peak efficiency
- Distributed work plans in order to reduce commutes
- Increased taxes on most consumables (even if it slowed GDP growth), including agribusiness
- Improved bike lanes/facilities in cities (including communal bike programs)
- Increase advertising budgets to promote 'sustainable' activities and decreased advertising that promote increased consumption
- Increased research budgets for energy efficiency
- Increased regulations on emissions.
etc.

Those helped to some extent.  But if we want people to quit driving with fossil fuels then we need to give them cars that are cheaper to purchase and cheaper to operate than FF powered cars.


Pmt111500

  • Guest
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #67 on: January 09, 2018, 06:39:12 AM »
Not yet voting, and probably won't. 2 first. The #3 happens anyway and imo it's silly to keep this option on the talks and polls. Now, if you had added 'actively' in the beginning, then it might have been. I f.e. have a friend who's planted oak and ash near the Arctic Circle and I've taken an elm sapling c.120 miles north of natural range. Maybe this helps. #4 would require a fundamental and permanent psychological change in the capitalists brains, so this cannot be trusted. Oh, there was also 'other solutions' grouped with geoengineering. If these would be tech fantasies of continued disaster capitalism, definitely no,  if renewable energy then possibly.

As there are at least three options which are ambiguous in nature, not voting here. Thanks for setting this poll up anyhow.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 07:03:00 AM by Pmt111500 »

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 121
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #68 on: January 09, 2018, 06:57:38 AM »
Withdrew my earlier vote. No4 depends on what Paddy meant with "other solutions", but he never responded to that. That could include unwanted solutions and countermeasures as well.
I probably read too much into that one.

Why not include the only option we have right now; hope.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Bob Wallace

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3855
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #69 on: January 09, 2018, 07:13:11 AM »
Quote
I've taken an elm sapling c.120 miles north of natural range. Maybe this helps.

I wonder if we should help large trees move toward the poles faster?  They'll go on their own as temps rise but we might be able to push things a bit faster and get at least a small amount of carbon sequestered.

At the least we might help offset losing the Western forests which is underway.  As large trees burn away they, to a large extent, will not be replaced.   It's going to be too hot and dry where they once grew.

Paddy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 84
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #70 on: January 09, 2018, 08:59:11 AM »
Withdrew my earlier vote. No4 depends on what Paddy meant with "other solutions", but he never responded to that. That could include unwanted solutions and countermeasures as well.
I probably read too much into that one.

Why not include the only option we have right now; hope.

Sorry about that. I wasn't very specific, but I was thinking other engineered solutions that might not count as full on geoengineering, particularly direct temperature reduction by eg increasing heat reflected in building design (white rooftops, white roads etc).
« Last Edit: January 09, 2018, 09:34:46 PM by Paddy »

Sleepy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1202
  • Retired, again...
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 121
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #71 on: January 09, 2018, 09:18:14 AM »
Thanks for the clarification Paddy.
Omnia mirari, etiam tritissima.
-
Science is a jealous mistress and takes little account of a man's feelings.

Paddy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 69
  • Likes Given: 84
Re: Poll: Relative importance of countermeasures
« Reply #72 on: January 15, 2018, 04:28:07 PM »
So a spread of results between all four, with reducing emissions a clear favourite. No big surprise there.