tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post8699685538345948173..comments2024-03-25T05:30:23.847+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: A strong, alarming warning from scientific luminaries: We have to decide...Souhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-59965683133402706672016-02-11T05:31:12.186+11:002016-02-11T05:31:12.186+11:00It's moot that a couple of centuries of rapid,...It's moot that a couple of centuries of rapid, disruptive environmental change will leave standing a technological civilisation capable of global cooperation and geoengineering on a superhuman scale. I'm all for optimism, but there are limits. BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-50544996250548698732016-02-11T03:34:40.135+11:002016-02-11T03:34:40.135+11:00"If reading the words is all just too much wo..."If reading the words is all just too much work, he can focus on Fig. 17 p. 138."<br /><br />Well there's a thing, my copy fell open at that very page with a bookmark in it, a bookmark with a print of the Periodic Table - now obsolete.<br /><br />Of course if you shoot all the messengers (CSIRO now and if the Repug's win the next US election [1] NASA. NOAA etc could be on the ropes) we can rush blindly the future and not have to worry.<br /><br />[1] Read Jane Meyers book <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/17/dark-money-review-nazi-oil-the-koch-brothers-and-a-rightwing-revolution" rel="nofollow">reviewed here</a> <br /><br />for clues as to who could be bankrolling the fix, after all they helped Newt.Lionel Ahttp://lionels.orpheusweb.co.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-72476003023163879002016-02-11T01:56:14.805+11:002016-02-11T01:56:14.805+11:00On my gloomier days, I have doubts that we can avo...On my gloomier days, I have doubts that we can avoid disaster becoming catastrophe. But if we survive it and work toward a re-livable world, the irreversible destruction of the Holocene will unfold over a couple of centuries, not millennia.Treesongnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-31880567588327903252016-02-11T01:46:34.694+11:002016-02-11T01:46:34.694+11:00There's obviously nothing thermodynamically di...There's obviously nothing thermodynamically difficult about damming the WAIS or geoengineering, say, a cooling stratosphere. As for carbon capture, plants.<br />I'm not arguing for a techno-utopia, I'm arguing against the likelihood of a techno-dystopia if we can survive the next century or two. I see no reason to believe anything in your fourth paragraph.<br /><br />None of which, of course, is to say that Plans C-Z won't be horrible.Treesongnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-10552513472916108242016-02-10T23:25:45.386+11:002016-02-10T23:25:45.386+11:00"There's nothing physically impossible ab..."<i>There's nothing physically impossible about drawing down carbon, damming the WAIS drainage, geoengineering cooling of the planet, and so on; if it has to be done, it will be done, particularly once it's clear to even the most brainless voters and politicians that it's a matter of their own survival.</i>"<br /><br />I beg to differ on a few points...<br /><br />There's a big difference between something not being "physically impossible" and it being actually <i>thermodynamically</i> possible. The whole premise of technomagickery is predicated on the suspension of many laws of physics - and of ecology - including avoidance of Spengel's law of the minimum and Jevon's paradox.<br /><br />Further, some fragments of technological civilisation may well survive catastrophe, but this does not mean that its further growth is guaranteed. There may be paths that are permanently shut to them because of the physical nature of future catastrophies at various points along the timeline, or simply because the focus of attention in such a world is such that innovation takes a different path, and one that does not return the previous status quo.<br /><br />It's the nature of ecosystems that serious changes beyond tipping points are not easily corrected. And the profoundly energetic and culturally-/philosophically-alien efforts that would be required to repair a planet that had heated to 4 C or more above baseline are simply beyond the evolutionary psychology and the fundamental physics that constrain humans on this little blue marble.<br /><br />One way of thinking about the apparent inevitability of a techno-Utopia is that it doesn't seem to have occurred anywhere within a few dozen light years of this corner of the Milky Way. If it had we'd have little green neighbours, and the last time I looked we were still very much alone in the universe... If it hasn't happened in our neighbourhood it's not likely to happen here.<br /><br />There's only one feasible way to deal with the profound threat of climate change, and that is to not change it in the first place. The only half-feasible Plan B is to stop inflicting damage if you do start to change it - and unfortunately we're still dragging our heels even with that option.<br /><br />There will be no "Six Million Dollar" Planet option as any of Plans C through to Z.Bernard J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16299073166371273808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-91378734818952443412016-02-10T20:45:14.683+11:002016-02-10T20:45:14.683+11:00We're ffed.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...We're ffed.<br />http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-02-09/obama-s-clean-power-plan-put-on-hold-by-u-s-supreme-courtcRR Kampenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07571285063752477448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-75428568647588154012016-02-10T19:57:37.923+11:002016-02-10T19:57:37.923+11:00Perhaps the problem is a perceived solipsism. Ther...Perhaps the problem is a perceived solipsism. There's more to consider than fear of a near-term human catastrophe. That should be our clear and present concern, of course, but this does nothing to diminish the human responsibility for the destruction of the Holocene world that will unfold over millennia. <br /><br />BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-21789906629472845432016-02-10T12:11:41.898+11:002016-02-10T12:11:41.898+11:00The risk of nuclear war, and after a few years, mo...The risk of nuclear war, and after a few years, more warming. An of course wet bulb temperatures above 37C and enough CO2 to make you stupid outside.I hope our kids get fusion power.Drunk Country Doctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01982466061214432869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-6879379814796566632016-02-10T07:06:21.789+11:002016-02-10T07:06:21.789+11:00What I'm trying to say is that catastrophe in ...What I'm trying to say is that catastrophe in the next hundred years is what worries me; catastrophe even in the next five hundred years adds no further fear. And in this I am in no way 'discounting the future' to make all future problems seem irrelevant.Treesongnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-57270272362441912732016-02-10T06:42:06.663+11:002016-02-10T06:42:06.663+11:00Sou, I don't see the relevance of the quotatio...Sou, I don't see the relevance of the quotation. It doesn't matter if emissions are triple those of the paper; as long as technological civilization survives drowning of the seacoasts, food riots in the remaining cities, and so on, we will solve the problems. There's nothing physically impossible about drawing down carbon, damming the WAIS drainage, geoengineering cooling of the planet, and so on; if it has to be done, it will be done, particularly once it's clear to even the most brainless voters and politicians that it's a matter of their own survival.<br />And I repeat that in no way am I denying catastrophe: billions dying, oceans depopulated by acidification, horrible consequences of geoengineering, Soylent Green, whatever. But a scenario in which mankind has no effect on the climate besides increasing CO2 should be thought of as a lesson, not a realistic projection.Treesongnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-33889043845981641152016-02-10T05:44:18.076+11:002016-02-10T05:44:18.076+11:00To be fair the press release that Sou links to is ...To be fair the press release that Sou links to is from Marcott's university (U Wisconsin) and quotes him heavily. Presumably Clark's university (Oregon State U) issued a press release as well, but it's not the source for the Science Daily article. This is not to suggest that the Serengeti Strategy is not alive and well.MarkBnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-84265788794488810512016-02-10T04:58:46.189+11:002016-02-10T04:58:46.189+11:00SLR due to drainage of the WAIS will be a secondar...SLR due to drainage of the WAIS will be a secondary concern if the AMOC significantly weakens - Recent studies of Arctic freshwater fluxes are no cause for optimism.<br /><br />http://labs.cas.usf.edu/geodesy/articles/2016/yang_etal_2016.pdfThe Very Reverend Jebediah Hypotenusenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-62255766753556776172016-02-10T04:32:40.157+11:002016-02-10T04:32:40.157+11:00Good idea. He can crack it open at p. 137 chapter ...Good idea. He can crack it open at <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=iG81MbhL9RgC&pg=PA138&lpg=PA138&dq=david+archer+the+long+thaw+Figure+17+Covariation+of+sea+level+with+global+average+temperature&source=bl&ots=UvwaKj0XIH&sig=EU_gkr8741dlIUcBq8dAw5H62-U&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwih-unOmuvKAhWGKA8KHVDPAh0Q6AEIIDAA#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow">p. 137 chapter 11</a>. If reading the words is all just too much work, he can focus on Fig. 17 p. 138. BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-85072322217480799222016-02-10T04:23:55.316+11:002016-02-10T04:23:55.316+11:00Perhaps Tony should read David Archer's "...Perhaps Tony should read David Archer's "The Long Thaw".Rattus Norvegicushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03449457204330125792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-25278548753081434362016-02-10T03:22:28.276+11:002016-02-10T03:22:28.276+11:00Once the gravity-driven drainage of the WAIS gets ...Once the <b>gravity-driven</b> drainage of the WAIS gets underway it will be unstoppable by human agency and multimetre SLR will be locked in. That would be a long term catastrophe, in my book. BBDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10687930416706386215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-50969250531328466132016-02-10T01:19:22.375+11:002016-02-10T01:19:22.375+11:00That's not so, Treesong. The press release isn...That's not so, Treesong. The press release isn't clear, but from the paper:<br /><br /><i>The highest emission scenario in our projections (release of 5,120 Pg C to the atmosphere) is substantially lower than known and currently attainable carbon reserves and resources, which are estimated to be between ~9,500 and 15,700 Pg C (ref. 42). </i>Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-52079970560632595162016-02-10T01:09:26.632+11:002016-02-10T01:09:26.632+11:00The prediction assumes that we burn all the carbon...The prediction assumes that we burn all the carbon and do nothing about it. It may be true given those assumptions, but I think the second is highly improbable, unless technical civilization totally breaks down everywhere; solutions impossible in coming decades will be inevitable in coming centuries. So it's useful as an 'if this goes on' teaching tool but not as a prediction. (Predictions of near-term catastrophe, on the other hand, seem pretty plausible.)Treesongnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-73571388035709556432016-02-09T18:30:25.764+11:002016-02-09T18:30:25.764+11:00The WUWT method of predicting the future 10,000 ye...The WUWT method of predicting the future 10,000 years - curve fitting to 150 yrs of historic data - disagrees.MIllicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-66502307882950449052016-02-09T18:03:40.158+11:002016-02-09T18:03:40.158+11:00The Cornwall Alliance won't be worried. God...The Cornwall Alliance won't be worried. God'll fix it so carry on as usual.Catmandohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12313870265499015076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-87899509385235296602016-02-09T17:27:34.777+11:002016-02-09T17:27:34.777+11:00Despite Peter U. Clark being the lead author Antho...<br /><br />Despite <b>Peter U. Clark</b> being the lead author Anthony throws red meat to his desperate jackals by making the paper <b>Marcott's</b> in his headline:<br /><i>Marcott discovers that “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future” while saying “it’s worse than we thought”</i>PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10807913317731807617noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-53458115428144397222016-02-09T17:17:00.414+11:002016-02-09T17:17:00.414+11:00Hmmm, I think that my previous comment has ended u...Hmmm, I think that my previous comment has ended up in the span bin...<br /><br />Anyway, I just wanted to note that this is a whopper of a paper, in a good way. In particular I wanted to observe that the human population curve is likely to emulate the rate of atmospheric CO2 change shown in figures 4d and 4e. The only difference is that the lower the overall CO2 emissions scenario, the more likely that the population trajectory will have a shoulder on the right hand side of the peak.Bernard J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/16299073166371273808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-62075568269710773502016-02-09T15:22:51.903+11:002016-02-09T15:22:51.903+11:00Deniers shouldn't have any problems with 10,00...Deniers shouldn't have any problems with 10,000 years, it is a mere blink of the eye geologically-speaking. I have had deniers argue with me about the relevance of CO2 over 450 million year timespans.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.com