Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
Different approach, or throwing in the towel

Posted by david52 z5CO (My Page) on
Tue, Apr 1, 14 at 19:36

At the link is an interesting take on the new IPCC report - they're starting to put far more emphasis on adapting to radical rapid climate change.

snip

"First, a definition of terms is in order. Since the 1990s, the climate-policy community has been engaged in a debate about whether to focus on reducing emissions ("mitigation"), managing climate change ("adaptation"), or both. But in a 2007 article for Nature, a team of academics gave three reasons for why the "taboo on adaptation" was gradually disappearing:

1. The "timescale mismatch": Even if world leaders take decisive action to cut emissions (a big "if"), it won't have an impact on the climate for decades, and greenhouse-gas concentrations will continue to increase in the meantime.

2. The emissions fallacy: People are vulnerable to the climate for reasons other than greenhouse-gas emissions, including factors like socioeconomic inequality and rapid population growth along coasts.

3. The demands of developing countries: While wealthy countries account for most greenhouse-gas emissions, poor countries suffer the most damage from climate change. And these developing countries want the international community to help them become less vulnerable to the extreme climactic events they're facing now, rather than arguing over emission targets that will theoretically protect them in the future." snip

This year's IPCC report goes into great detail about how these strategies can work on every continent, identifying "key risks" and "adaptation prospects" that players - whether they be governments, businesses, or non-profits - should be prioritizing. (The World Resources Institute also has an excellent series of blog posts on the different roles that multinational corporations, small- and medium-sized businesses, and public-private partnerships can play here.) - snip

So they're pretty much giving up on any global agreements and now talking about heading towards higher ground. I dunno if thats good or bad news - maybe just a realization that its too late.

Here is a link that might be useful: link


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

"So they're pretty much giving up on any global agreements and now talking about heading towards higher ground. I dunno if thats good or bad news - maybe just a realization that its too late."

Thanks for posting this, David. I've been looking at this, too. I think it's practical.


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

I'm thinking of moving to a second floor condo


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

Not me, Tobr... I'm thinking of moving further out of range of society in general... and I'm already quite rural. But I still want my feet firmly planted on the ground.

I think it's already quite plain to see that Climate Change is very real, and will have effects, some greater than others, on our planet and its many continents... and is already having effects. I think the timetable to greater problems caused by the effects is sooner than we might think, and I think that if our world leaders neglect to act, and soon, like now, those problems will be greater still in the future.

Greed has a very tight hold on much of what is happening, worldwide... more's the pity.


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

Take a good hard look at these 'adaptation' strategies. Many are big and chemical.


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 18:00

# 66 or 67? ...I'll pick #66 as 6 is my lucky number.


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Thu, Apr 3, 14 at 9:01

In order to conserve numbers.......

"snip"

"The Arctic melt season is averaging five days longer with each passing decade, a new study by NASA and the National Snow and Ice Data Center reveals. And with more ice-free days, the water (which is darker than the surrounding ice) is absorbing the sun’s heat and accelerating the process. This means the Arctic ice cap has shrank by as much as four feet.
The sobering news comes following a study of satellite data from 1979 to 2013. By the end of this century, scientists believe, there will be a fully melted Arctic Ocean during the entire summer. And the news also comes in the same week that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its own report on global warming.....

Full story below.....

Here is a link that might be useful: NASA report


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

And... if we do nothing to mitigate, what happens to all the wildlife that depends upon Arctic ice, and as a result, what happens to those peoples who depend on those Arctic animals, both fish and game, for survival?


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

Posted by jodik 5 (My Page) on
Thu, Apr 3, 14 at 9:08

And... if we do nothing to mitigate, what happens to all the wildlife that depends upon Arctic ice, and as a result, what happens to those peoples who depend on those Arctic animals, both fish and game, for survival?

*

What happens is what has always happened--a beautiful adaptive process called evolution.

Only present day man is myopic and self important enough to assume that life today should remain as it is.


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

  • Posted by rosie Southeast 7A/B (My Page) on
    Thu, Apr 3, 14 at 12:03

Demi, I feel pretty sure that people dying from climate extremes were never comforted by suspecting that any survivors in the future would have developed the lizard skins or flippers they needed then.

Interesting question, though. Disregarding all the people apparently philosophically worthless even to themselves who are dying now and will die, IF evolution is required, what will we have evolved to 50,000 years from now? (Evolution does take a while, after all.) I'm thinking rear hooves that can race up cliffs to escape flood and hands with powerful claws that can dig quick burrows to tunnel down to the dark coolness, maybe?


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

Maybe the Inuit will prove to have remarkable powers running investment banks and hedge funds. Move to Wall Street, buy out everybody, and replace whale and seal hunting with vulture capitalism.

True evolution, that.


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

  • Posted by rosie Southeast 7A/B (My Page) on
    Thu, Apr 3, 14 at 12:20

And all the great real estate on the beautiful North Canadian Riviera will be taken up by their estates. :)

David, for some years now I've assumed this step would be inevitable. 40 years ago is when our geology professor said stopping climate change was urgent -- back then.

That's also when the Koch brothers, et al around the planet, set themselves to making sure we didn't do anything to slow down their gravy train. Not, of course, to diminish the contributions of the Great Indifferent, the Great Ignorant, and the Great Self-Deceivers.

So here we are. I'm guessing it won't be either-or. We'll do both, but first we have to get poked with big painful and costly climate sticks--requiring emergency protection. Then, after the pains and losses have built enough, we'll finally take the kind of actions we always should have.

Such a shame that it's the Great Helpless living in places like Bangladesh who are hurting bad first. Obviously, that's just going to encourage people elsewhere to philosophize about other people's need to evolve.

This post was edited by rosie on Thu, Apr 3, 14 at 12:47


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

Bangladesh has been planning how to deal with climate change for some time now - at the link is a great article from the National Geographic from 2011.

Well worth a read

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
Geoengineering !

The big money is gathering behind plans to 'help' with geoengineering / climate engineering. Heard about this on the Diane Rehm Show, over the winter. Great guests pro and con. Cant find it to reference for you.

Here's an excerpt from an old article -may 2013
Clive Hamilton - NYT -
" The idea of building a vast industrial infrastructure to offset the effects of another vast industrial infrastructure (instead of shifting to renewable energy) only highlights our unwillingness to confront the deeper causes of global warming �" the power of the fossil-fuel lobby and the reluctance of wealthy consumers to make even small sacrifices.

Even so, greater anxieties arise from those geoengineering technologies designed to intervene in the functioning of the earth system as a whole. They include ocean iron fertilization and sulfate aerosol spraying, each of which now has a scientific-commercial constituency.

How confident can we be, even after research and testing, that the chosen technology will work as planned? After all, ocean fertilization �" spreading iron slurry across the seas to persuade them to soak up more carbon dioxide �" means changing the chemical composition and biological functioning of the oceans. In the process it will interfere with marine ecosystems and affect cloud formation in ways we barely understand.

Enveloping the earth with a layer of sulfate particles would cool the planet by regulating the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth’s surface. One group of scientists is urging its deployment over the melting Arctic now. "

Here is a link that might be useful: complete article


 o
RE: Different approach, or throwing in the towel

  • Posted by rosie Southeast 7A/B (My Page) on
    Thu, Apr 3, 14 at 14:07

What a great article, David. I can't have read it before or I'd remember it. The char dwellers definitely have lessons to teach about adaptation. I should have referred to the Great Hapless of the non- or late industrialized countries, instead of Helpless. They are experiencing some of the worst of the first consequences of climate change, instead of industrialized nations. Just opposite of the way it needed to be.

BTW, something else I don't remember that's impressive: "Bangladesh developed a grassroots family-planning program in the 1970s that has lowered its fertility rate from 6.6 children per woman in 1977 to about 2.4 today -- a historic record for a country with so much poverty and illiteracy."


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here