[v1p3r]

Originally Posted by Tucker48

I don't support global warming activists as I'm not opposed to global warming.

I apologise, but this is a dangerous method of thinking. We are discussing global warming through anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

There is also no point scapegoating a mid-teenage girl who at least has the fortitude to speak truth to power, by comparing her to underprivileged people in a form of whataboutery. Her carbon footprint is certainly lower than other people in her socio-economic strata.

Just some context - I have worked in this field for a few years now. I gave up my previous job to start something in this area, after one of my friend's infant children almost died as a result of man-made emissions. The dangers are very, very, very real. The only reason people are wishy-washy about it in general is that the results are not immediately obvious. If you drink a glass of dirty water, you will fall ill soon, if not immediately. If you breathe bad air, or pollute incessantly, you may well live many years without personally suffering the consequences. Luckily, things are changing. TBHP, as a microcosm, is proof of how attitudes around the world have changed in the last few years.

I hope the above places my strong reaction in context.

[MasterChief]

Originally Posted by Tucker48

Global warming is real.
Climate change is real.
But it's quite foolish of us to assume we can stop that. Change is an going process. Sahara was green. The earth was way warmer even without humans(no ice at all).
We are still in an ice age and it's a cycle.
Indian plate is moving 5cm/year to north-east.(Himalayas are still rising)

There are numerous other factors at play as well but are hardly ever talked about.

There is a difference between the past periods of global warmth and the present. And that is the "rate of change". Yes, there have been periods in the past when the earth was way warmer but to reach to that warmth, it took thousands of years that provided ample time to flora and fauna to adapt accordingly. To take a very recent example, the Last Glacial Maximum (when mammoths and the sabre-toothed cats roamed) was at 21,000 years ago and the Holocene (the present warm period) commenced around 11,000 years. So it took around 10,000 years for the transition. So, the rate of change was quite low.

Now, the current global warming due to fossil fuel burning has occurred over the last 150 years or so i.e., at a very rapid pace. The rate of change is very high, which makes all the difference. The present CO2 level is around 415 ppm. Last time when we had such high CO2 concentration was 3 million years ago during a period known as MPWP (Mid-Pliocene Warm Period). At that time the sea level was ~30 m higher than the present. The earth's climate will take time to respond to the high CO2 we are gleefully putting in the atmosphere but when it does and crosses that threshold, then there will be an abrupt change with massive ice loss, sea-level rise (due to melting ice and thermal expansion of water), extreme weather (more droughts and more floods), intense ocean acidification (due to high partial pressure of CO2) and other ill effects highlighted in several posts above. Even in past, such abrupt climate change events were associated with mass extinction events when several species were obliterated from the face of the earth. I hope nobody wants the same for Homo sapiens.

So, in essence, global warming is a clear and present danger. Surely, nobody can stop it but all the efforts being made for its mitigation needs to be supported.

[PGA]

Sharing two observations;

In summers when I start back from my farm in the evenings, the car thermometer reads say X degs Celsius, I travel about a km on the kutcha track before hitting the NH, the reading on the NH is X+2 degs C, I cross two small towns on the way back, the temperature goes up and then down again by about 1-2 deg C, I reach the outskirts of my home town its now steady X+4 degs C, I cross a normally choked over bridge the temp is reading X+6 deg C and at times X+8 deg C and it settles atleast X+4 deg C when I park at home, and my home has three acres of greens around it and no multi stories. In winters the difference is about X+2 degs C. So much for the heat islands in the urban areas.

Another aspect that I have experienced is greater average minimum temperatures during summers and maximum temperatures during winters. While its the other way round that makes the headlines, the max temp in summers and min temps in winters. Higher average min temp in summers and max temp in winters doesn't allow requisite cooling of the environment and is resulting in dipping of yields in almost all crops. If I recollect correctly from a seminar on this aspect at Punjab Agri Univ last year, indicated that we seem to have already crossed 1 degree C increase of average min and max temps in summers and winters respectively.

[Kosfactor]

Originally Posted by libranof1987

One of the most tragic realities in India is the poor adoption of rainwater harvesting and solar power. Given the abundant rain (most of) India receives and the plentiful sunlight almost the entire year across India, proactive Govt. policies will go a tremendous distance in solving two of India's biggest problems: water and electricity.

We have made economic policies and decisions that curbed industrial growth, the very same growth that could have provided much needed revenue to subsidize renewable energy sources.

The slowing economic growth also reduced the capacity utilization of thermal power plants, now we have excess capacity and no incentive to build more in terms of renewable sources.

India has one of the lowest per capita green house emissions and guess who are the lowest among this? the poorest of the people. We have a responsibility to ensure they get to live and prosper.

In other words, Economic growth and industrialization is necessary for us to go green eventually while maintaining modern living standards. This message is often lost on the green brigade who are up against diesel cars and plastic and so on.

[nvldvr]

Originally Posted by Tucker48

Global warming is real.
Climate change is real.
But it's quite foolish of us to assume we can stop that.

I don't support global warming activists as I'm not opposed to global warming. The only thing I'm opposed to is pollution, any kind including that pollutes our brains.

Originally Posted by mohansrides

I will say one thing. The global warming crew sure caught a break. They have never had it so good and things are only looking up for them with this virus staying around for a long time.

Right now, they just fell onto a pile of money. In their wildest wet dreams, they would not have imagined this sort of cessation of human activity on a mass scale. This gives them a chance to demonstrate to the world the upsides to the environment.

Originally Posted by dragracer567

Exactly and moreover, climate change occurring naturally is much slower. We've done in 150 years what normally takes 10,000 years, so life just can't adapt quick enough to this change.

I repeat, natural and human-induced climate are wholly different. We need change now and doing nothing is not an option!

Originally Posted by v1p3r

I apologise, but this is a dangerous method of thinking. We are discussing global warming through anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

The dangers are very, very, very real. The only reason people are wishy-washy about it in general is that the results are not immediately obvious.

I hope the above places my strong reaction in context.

Originally Posted by MasterChief

There is a difference between the past periods of global warmth and the present. And that is the "rate of change".

Now, the current global warming due to fossil fuel burning has occurred over the last 150 years or so i.e., at a very rapid pace.
Even in past, such abrupt climate change events were associated with mass extinction events when several species were obliterated from the face of the earth. I hope nobody wants the same for Homo sapiens.

So, in essence, global warming is a clear and present danger. Surely, nobody can stop it but all the efforts being made for its mitigation needs to be supported.

Originally Posted by Kosfactor

In other words, Economic growth and industrialization is necessary for us to go green eventually while maintaining modern living standards. This message is often lost on the green brigade who are up against diesel cars and plastic and so on.

1. In my opinion, the following views exist vis-a-vis the issue of global warming:-

(a) A large majority are blissfully unaware of this issue entirely. This may be on account of lack of education/ awareness.

(b) Of the people who are aware of this term, majority are not bothered about it due to some/ all of the following reasons:-

(i) They reject this issue out right, and consider it as a hoax/unwarranted fear mongering.

(ii) Global warming does not affect their lives.

(iii) Even if the issue is real, it is not going to have any immediate ramifications. The future generations should handle the issue, as and when it becomes an issue of some "real" concern.

(c) The number of people who are concerned with the issue as a clear, present and immediate threat to life as we know it, or infact to our very existence, is in absolute minority. People who are doing anything actionable to address the issue, is, ofcourse negligible.

(d) The worst part is that the policy makers/ people with the required resources who can, or could have, actually addressed the issue, also have other / vested interests, which makes addressing climate change the least of their concerns.

2. As I see it, homo sapiens as a species have already caused irreversible damage to our eco system. Further, as the natural instinct of any living being is to use the resources available to it to the fullest extent, to make it's present safe/ comfortable, this exploitation of our habitat will go on as hitherto, regardless of the noise being created by the "climate warriors".

3. However, repercussions of unchecked global warming are going to be catastrophic. In my opinion, increased CO2 / methane levels and reduced ice covers on the poles will in all probability lead to an exponential rise in global temperatures in a few decades itself, resulting in extinction of majority of the planet's species,including homo sapiens, being a very real possibility in the not too distant future.

[C300]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Earlier we thought that climate change was a trouble we were dumping on our children or grand children but that is increasingly seeming too optimistic. Climate change and its effects are on us now and will by all counts only worsen. Think of more frequent & stronger hurricanes, giant forest fires, droughts, melting glaciers, hotter & longer summers, erratic rainfall and more.

The geo-politics of the 2020s to the 2050s will be shaped more by climate change and its consequence of water & food supply than anything else.

Couldn't agree more.
The real wealth of a nation/society is soil, water, air, rivers, oceans, wildlife and biodiversity.
We all can play our part to protect mother Earth

• Plant Trees - On birthdays, anniversaries, gift tree saplings whenever possible. Visit local forest nursery. Take your kids to the nursery. Many NGOs are working in this area. Join the tree army in your area/city.

• Reduce waste - Reuse and recycle to cut down on waste

• Shop Local as much as possible

[nvldvr]

https://youtu.be/HnnLy7Phx5c

As we discuss possible dooms day scenarios due to global warming, there are people working to make extraction/ removal or CO2 from air a reality. Whilst all these proposals are still at the inception/ trials stage only, there is always an outside chance that one of these may have the potential to be scaled up to the levels required. Hope against hope..

[Tucker48]

Originally Posted by nvldvr

Well, the primary difference between geological events of the past that you quoted and the current global warming is that whilst those events of the past were all natural, the current global warming (specifically since the dawn of the industrial age) is largely man made. So to shrug your shoulders and say that there is nothing that humans can or could have done to avoid this is not correct IMO.

We as a species would have to adapt to this for sure though, because we have landed ourselves in an almost inextricable situation and there is hardly a way around it. As I mentioned earlier, we may have run out of time already.

I didn't say that we shouldn't do anything. We can eliminate pollution and should work on that. Global warming is a phenomenon although helped a little by humans but can't be categorised as good or bad for humans. It's too early to say that. Moreover, the very basic things we need for our survival contribute to greenhouse gases. Food is a major contributor, be it vegetarian or non vegetarian.
The developed countries knew about CFC's depleting ozone layer and yet they sat on that for years.
When I said numerous other factors that might be at play, ozone layer is one of them. Another is shifting of magnetic poles. Another one is expanding Sun. I'm sure there are other factors that I'm not aware of and there are factors that no one is aware of. And how these factors effect us, we know only a little.
Change is the only constant in this universe. If anything that stops changing (relative to its time) then that thing is dead. The only thing is that we will have to evolve to live with the changes as we have been doing for millennia.

[Tucker48]

Originally Posted by MasterChief

There is a difference between the past periods of global warmth and the present. And that is the "rate of change". Yes, there have been periods in the past when the earth was way warmer but to reach to that warmth, it took thousands of years that provided ample time to flora and fauna to adapt accordingly. To take a very recent example, the Last Glacial Maximum (when mammoths and the sabre-toothed cats roamed) was at 21,000 years ago and the Holocene (the present warm period) commenced around 11,000 years. So it took around 10,000 years for the transition. So, the rate of change was quite low.

Now, the current global warming due to fossil fuel burning has occurred over the last 150 years or so i.e., at a very rapid pace. The rate of change is very high, which makes all the difference. The present CO2 level is around 415 ppm. Last time when we had such high CO2 concentration was 3 million years ago during a period known as MPWP (Mid-Pliocene Warm Period). At that time the sea level was ~30 m higher than the present. The earth's climate will take time to respond to the high CO2 we are gleefully putting in the atmosphere but when it does and crosses that threshold, then there will be an abrupt change with massive ice loss, sea-level rise (due to melting ice and thermal expansion of water), extreme weather (more droughts and more floods), intense ocean acidification (due to high partial pressure of CO2) and other ill effects highlighted in several posts above. Even in past, such abrupt climate change events were associated with mass extinction events when several species were obliterated from the face of the earth. I hope nobody wants the same for Homo sapiens.

So, in essence, global warming is a clear and present danger. Surely, nobody can stop it but all the efforts being made for its mitigation needs to be supported.

Yes you are right with the stated facts but even the rate of change is not a constant. The rate of change changes as well.
Assuming global warming is as bad as you predict but water vapours are the biggest contributor to greenhouse gases. Food is a major contributor too.
The effect of ozone layer which has started to heal, the change in magnetic poles, the expansion of sun, the behaviour of photons when we observe or don't observe them and God knows what other factors are at play here. So I would say let's focus on pollution because that will also take out some of the greenhouse gases and somewhat relate to general public as well.
Global warming is an alien concept for the majority of people because no one is fully aware about how this is going to take shape. The global temperatures have not increased in last 20 years!

Fun fact : photons of light behave differently when we observe them than what they are supposed to behave when we don't observe them and no one knows why even after so many years after Einstein discovered it first.

[V.Narayan]

What a 100-degree F day in Siberia really means

The record-setting high is much more than a quick spike for the Russian Arctic, where months of extreme heat may have dangerous consequences.


Article from National Geographic by Alejandra Borunda published on 23rd June 2020

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/s...limate-change/

Politicians in most parts of the world are busy with trade wars, grabbing territory, punishing dissent when the really big Black Swan in the room is climate change. As climate change creeps in on us at an increasingly faster pace it will make Covid19 look like child's play. The younger generations have started to understand that they will live long enough to witness the devastation climate change will bring while aged politicians & deniers will all be sleeping buried six feet under.


Excerpts from this article

An extended heat wave that has been baking the Russian Arctic for months drove the temperature in Verkhoyansk, Russia—north of the Arctic Circle—to 100.4°F on June 20, the official first day of summer in the Northern Hemisphere. This record high temperature is a signal of a rapidly and continually warming planet, and a preview of how Arctic warming will continue in an increasingly hot future, scientists say. Saturday’s record wasn’t just a quick spike before a return to more normal summer temperatures for the Russian Arctic: The heat wave behind it is projected to continue for at least another week. It was the hottest temperature ever recorded in the town, where records have been kept since 1885.

“At this time of the year, around the summer solstice, you get 24 hours of sunlight,” says Walt Meier, a climate scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center. “That’s a lot of solar energy coming in. So in these high-latitude areas—80 degrees, 90 degrees, that’s not unheard of.” But climate change is “loading the dice” toward extreme temperatures like the one recorded this week, he says. The Arctic is warming more than twice as fast as the rest of the planet: Baseline warmth in the high Arctic has increased by between 3.6 to 5.4°F(2 to 3°C) over the past hundred or so years. About 0.75°C of that has occurred in the last decade alone.

This month’s super-hot day emerged from a potent mix of factors. First, climate change nudged base temperatures up. Then, western Siberia experienced one of its hottest-ever spring seasons, according to climate scientists at the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service. Since December, air temperatures in the region have averaged nearly 11°F (6°C) above the average seen between 1979 and 2019. The high heat is also likely well above the average seen in any similar six-month stretch going back to 1880. In May, air temperatures hovered some 18°F (10°C) above the “normal” May average of 33.8°F (1°C )—something that would be likely to occur only once in 100,000 years, if human-caused climate change hadn’t thrown a wrench in the climate system’s plumbing.

All across Siberia, it has really been hot for long. January, then February, then March, then April. The pattern stands out. The warm winter and hot spring meant that the snow usually blanketing the ground across much of the region melted about a month earlier than normal. Bright white snow plays a crucial role in keeping parts of the Arctic cool, by reflecting the sun’s incoming heat. Once it had gone away, dirt and plants readily soaked up the heat instead.

In recent years, the effects of these kinds of immobile heat waves have become more obvious across the Arctic. In 2012, 97 percent of the Greenland ice sheet’s surface got so warm it turned essentially to slush. In 2016, it was so warm in High Arctic Svalbard, Norway, that rain fell instead of snow for part of the winter. Last summer, the edges of the Greenland ice sheet experienced up to three extra months of melting weather. Limpid blue pools formed on its surface; floods of melt gushed off the edge of the continent, and fires broke out in its sparse landscapes after a heat wave parked over the island for weeks.

But there’s little debate that the future holds much more extreme heat for the Arctic. Winter average temperatures in the Arctic have already exceeded the 3.6°F (2°C) threshold stated in the Paris climate agreement; predictions suggest the annual average temperature for the region will exceed that within decades.
"By 2100, under an extreme warming scenario, we would expect to see an event like this every year," says Robert Rohde, a climate scientist with Berkeley Earth.

Similar patterns are playing out at the southern pole, too. A site on the Antarctic Peninsula hit nearly 65°F (18.3°C) during January, its summertime.

The poles are warming up more quickly than the rest of Earth because of a phenomenon called “polar amplification.” The sea ice that used to blanket much of the Arctic Ocean provided a bright white cap across the northernmost reaches of the planet. Like the snow that reflects incoming solar radiation in Siberia, the ice bounced the sun’s heat back toward space.

But as Earth has warmed, there’s less sea ice covering the Arctic Ocean, leaving behind dark waters that absorb much more heat. Sea ice forms less readily in that warm water, leading the water to absorb even more solar heat, and the system goes on a self-reinforcing loop.

It’s difficult to say for sure that this or that single heat wave was worse because of climate change—and no one has yet done that analysis for this stretch of excessive Siberian warmth. But researchers found human-caused climate change’s fingerprints all over the heat wave that caused excessive melting in Greenland and across northern Europe last summer. 2019’s June heat—which caused temperatures in France to spike above 113°F (45°C), was at least five times more likely to occur because of human impacts. And some 60 percent of 2016’s excessive Arctic heat was attributable to human-caused climate change, scientists found.

[locusjag]

With the thawing ice in Greenland, Alaska and Siberian Tundra regions, not only are fossils seeing light of day for the first time in thousands or millions of years, lots of unseen microbes are being set loose into the environment apparently. These germs have been frozen over for such a long time that none of the current plants and fauna (including humans) can handle them.

Another negative of the thawing ice - pockets of methane are now being let loose into the atmosphere, where they were formerly iced over, they're now free to let the trapped methane away. So yet more greenhouse warming is in store for us, in a reinforcing loop.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by Tucker48

I don't support global warming activists as I'm not opposed to global warming. The only thing I'm opposed to is pollution, any kind including that pollutes our brains.

To be frank, we should not oppose even pollution. In today's world pollution gives an economical competitive edge to the lesser developed nations compared to the developed ones.

[DigitalOne]

Didn't know this thread existed.

In the last couple of days, there was a bit of interesting news.

A high profile environmental activist Michael Shellenberger has published an apology, for his role in helping to create the climate scare.

Forbes initially published the apology, but later censored it.

The apology is now published here

Excerpts from the article:

On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years.
Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.
I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.

Here are some facts few people know:
- Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
- The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
- Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
- Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003
....

Some people will, when they read this imagine that I’m some right-wing anti-environmentalist. I’m not. At 17, I lived in Nicaragua to show solidarity with the Sandinista socialist revolution. At 23 I raised money for Guatemalan women’s cooperatives....

I became an environmentalist at 16 when I threw a fundraiser for Rainforest Action Network. At 27 I helped save the last unprotected ancient redwoods in California. In my 30s I advocated renewables and successfully helped persuade the Obama administration to invest $90 billion into them....

Of course the apology article plugs his new book "Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All (2020)", but that still a viewpoint to be considered from an environmentalist.

Book should be an interesting read.

[Vishal.R]

Not going into debate of climate change v/s climate denial but one example of very strong impact of climate disruptions on overall our ecosystem and life is recent locust outbreak faced from Africa to Western India.

Interesting to know how more rains due to successive cyclones during 2018-2019 season in arid areas of middle east caused current situation.


Resources:

Wikipedia : 2019–20 locust infestation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vo61TiAGwhk

[V.Narayan]

Hottest September in history. Three months of the first nine broke the global record for average temperature.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/10/07/w...ntl/index.html

Searing heat in Europe, Australia, the Middle East and several other pockets of the world made last month the hottest September ever, the EU's Copernicus Climate Change Service has announced.

The Earth's average temperature was 0.05 degrees Celsius (0.09 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than the previous record, which was set last September.

Of the nine completed months this year, three have now broken the global record for average temperature by Copernicus' measures -- marking a dangerous and undeniable trend toward temperature levels that international groups have warned would be devastating to the Earth.

Over all, temperatures clocked in at 0.63 degrees Celsius warmer than the average for September over the past 40 years.

That means the month was nearly 1.3 degrees hotter than pre-industrial levels.
Global temperatures must be kept from rising by more than 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels to avoid major impacts on the climate, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded.

But the astonishing temperatures recorded only partially describe the dangers of global warming, a phenomenon that continued to affect the lives of millions last month.