Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by Exile

More commonly known as an economic recession or depression. Hurts poor people in the developing world the most.

. I don't think there's any chance at all that the whole 1st world is going to voluntarily curtail consumption for altruistic reasons (myself included) so I'm not worrying about it causing a worldwide recession at all. But still, generally speaking the more we consume the more we pollute and for most of us, there's plenty of room to cut back a little, especially when you consider that the average American has more toys than they can play with (I plead guilty.), more debt than they probably should have, and less in savings than will provide for even a marginally comfortable retirement. I know that I'm extremely financially conservative by nature so I can't even comprehend how they sleep at might when so many people spend, spend, spend when they don't really have it to spend. It's a credit crazy world out there and everyone is trying to keep up with the Jones's so I think there's a very good chance that our overall rate of consumption will continue unabated.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Actually, much of our exported coal is metallurgical coal.

I am confident you have a better assessment of this than I. The numbers I found suggest 2/3 metallurgical, 1/3 thermal.

Apparently Japan is Australia's biggest customer for both types? Didn't realize this. As might be expected, they have some ideas for using it more efficiently.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Originally Posted by Exile:

Over fishing the oceans is a big problem, but also one that is fixable if people & govts. were perhaps less fixated on CC.


Really?

I doubt if many people have thought of those two topics in the same hour. Before now, anyway.

I guess you forgot the long series of posts & ensuing discussion started by Muckle about more immediate and pressing environmental issues that are being smothered by the relentless attention on CC. That's OK, I'm sure it's hard for you to remember things from a couple of days ago.

Originally posted by Exile:

I'm sure people living in the middle ages watching half or more of their children die from dysentery believed their system was finite and never would have envisioned the development of modern sewer systems.

No, I suspect they were just sad that some of their children were dying, and that they still had to work tomorrow to try to feed the rest. Most never traveled more than 20 miles from the place they were born.

With few exceptions, it's only in the last century that there has been much public awareness that maybe the earth is finite.

Again, try and keep up L-E. The point goes back to the OP's article, namely that what we perceive to be the intractable problems we're stuck with today can rapidly change in ways that we are now unable to foresee.

[Kenomac]

WOW! 1263 posts and 27575 views for this climate change topic and the ten to twenty of us participants are still civil and enjoying the conversation. This has to be some sort of record here on CF regarding the subject. I just got back from the nuthouse and thought I'd check in. The rest of you guys must be retired or have exceptional typing skills, where do you find the time?.

Congratulations and thanks for keeping things on track as we circle back to the main theme.

Keep up the good work.

Ken

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Exile

The point goes back to the OP's article, namely that what we perceive to be the intractable problems we're stuck with today can rapidly change in ways that we are now unable to foresee.

Just an hour ago, I caught five minutes of a science fiction movie that came out five years ago. The scene showed three spaceship travelers on their way to another galaxy typing commands into their onboard computer using a digital, iPad-like keyboard. I turned to the nurse next to me and said "I just speak to Siri on my iPhone..... And she takes care of it for me."

Things will change and technology will advance quicker than you think it will.

[Simonsays]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Just an hour ago, I caught five minutes of a science fiction movie that came out five years ago. The scene showed three spaceship travelers on their way to another galaxy typing commands into their onboard computer using a digital, iPad-like keyboard. I turned to the nurse next to me and said "I just speak to Siri on my iPhone..... And she takes care of it for me."

Things will change and technology will advance quicker than you think it will.

the updates for Siri are still not programmed by talking to Siri though...
"hey Siri, improve that Mandarin recognition module please?!"

we do have things today that could not have been imagined when the original Star Trek Series was made
and we do have made things the way they were imagined in the first Star Trek Series, just because we can.

[IdoraKeeper]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Then I come along, an autodidact liberal that has some questions on the validity of AGW. I don't fit the graph. But that could be just because blonde happens.

Nah, it's perfectly understandable. It's about survival strategy and the implicit correlation of said strategy to political outlook and it's application in day to day life. i.e. It's cold on the boat. It's an inconvenient truth that is out of kilter with an otherwise logically consistent position.

Gotta hand it to Gord. He put his finger on the subtext of this thread. Very enjoyable even in it's length.

Re String Theory. Try reading the Elegant Universe by Brian Green. Not so much math as concept. We may see some result in the data coming out of the Large Hadron Collider following it's current run that begin to allow verifiable experiments that will test some aspects of String Theory predictions. Cool stuff indeed.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Exile

I'm sure people living in the middle ages watching half or more of their children die from dysentery believed their system was finite and never would have envisioned the development of modern sewer systems. Neither could the serfs living in feudal times imagine what freedoms the invention of the printing press would bring. This is the point of the OP's article. We don't now know, and more importantly have little way of knowing, what is truly finite or not.

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Things will change and technology will advance quicker than you think it will.

I grabbed these two recent quotes b/c they illustrate a core discussion and disagreement here. On the one hand we can trust in an unknown, and unknowable future where technology comes to our rescue. Or on the other hand we can use the knowledge and information we have now to do something now.

Maybe it comes down to faith or optimism.

History is ripe with examples of both paths. As Exile points out, modern sewage systems and the printing press propelled our western civillization well past the limits of its day, and were apparently unforeseen by most at the time.

Unfortunately history is also ripe with civillisation collapses, also due to unforeseen developments, both environmental and of our own making. Jared Diamond's books are perhaps the best known recent works in this area, but the archiological and historic literature is extensive in this area. Heck, the Bible documents numerous civilization collapses.

So, perhaps it comes down to the sage words by the great Western philosopher (Dirty) Harry Callahan: "Do you feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?

My approach is shaped by my general view on life: The only thing I know for sure is what's here in front of me. And since the only one I can really control or change is me, I do the best I can with the best information I have now.

Originally Posted by Kenomac

WOW! 1263 posts and 27575 views for this climate change topic and the ten to twenty of us participants are still civil and enjoying the conversation.

On this I fully agree. And I thank the mods as well who have allowed the conversation to carry on, despite it stretching the limits of CF's strict rules at times.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Exile

I guess you forgot the long series of posts & ensuing discussion started by Muckle about more immediate and pressing environmental issues that are being smothered by the relentless attention on CC. That's OK, I'm sure it's hard for you to remember things from a couple of days ago.

That point was, and is, kind of bogus. Most of the people who are against action on AGW are equally down on anything else green, too. The other issues aren't 'blocked' by AGW, they will never make it to the starting gate with those people. We did pretty much see and discuss this here, no? We should all try to keep up.

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

Those of us fortunate enough to enjoy the relative luxury of first world lifestyles tend to take it for granted that the whole world is like this. It's not! The reality is that all the advantages we enjoy would not have been possible without the cheap energy that burning fossil allows. IF we're all willing to spend a lot more of our disposable incomes on it, we "might" be able to buy enough expensive alternative energy for our own use but we surely can't afford to also buy similar amounts of energy for the hundreds of millions of people currently living third world lifestyles and of course they can't afford to buy it for themselves. Anything we do while the third world continues to burn coal for their energy needs will having no meaningful impact on CO2 levels which is what AGW chicken littles seem to think is so critically important. Worldwide, meaningful changes in how energy is produced will mean denying those hundreds of millions in the third world any chance to ever enjoy anything close to the lifestyles you and I take for granted. You might be OK with that, but I doubt if they are. Of course you'll never run into these people and you'll never see the misery they endure as a result of your misguided policy so you can feel good about having "done something," congratulations.

Um... this is just wrong. Half the world total of emissions are produced by the richest 1 billion people; i.e. you and me. In total, 85 percent are emitted by the wealthiest 3 billion. Because change doesn't happen overnight, the effect of the poorest 4 billion will have little effect on the manmade worldwide CO2 emissions for probably at least 25 years. Plus whatever new power generation techniques they use will (theoretically) have the advantage of learning from the mistakes the (now) first world made previously.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

Um... this is just wrong. Half the world total of emissions are produced by the richest 1 billion people; i.e. you and me. In total, 85 percent are emitted by the wealthiest 3 billion. Because change doesn't happen overnight, the effect of the poorest 4 billion will have little effect on the manmade worldwide CO2 emissions for probably at least 25 years. Plus whatever new power generation techniques they use will (theoretically) have the advantage of learning from the mistakes the (now) first world made previously.

The poorest 4 billion certainly do have advantages provided by the technologies of the richest 1 billion. I recently watched a documentary about Crappistan that showed some of the local tribesman using cell phones. Geez, all of them had cellphones.... no running water, open sewers, mud houses complete with indoor livestock.... but they all had cellphones. I guess the turd word needs to get their priorities in order? Hard to visualize this gang getting behind lowering CO2 emissions.

Should the tribesman be required to pay a carbon tax on their cellphones which are manufactured by the polluting nations?

Interesting, that the AK47s they had slung over their shoulders were probably obtained by trading a few chickens, whereas the same guns would cost $500 or more in the US.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

The poorest 4 billion certainly do have advantages provided by the technologies of the richest 1 billion. I recently watched a documentary about Crappistan that showed some of the local tribesman using cell phones.

Indeed, the world's poorest are benefitting from cell technology that we invested in. This enabled them to leapfrog over the 'wired' home communications stage that we went through over the last century.

Now it's time for us to invest in better, more efficient, sustainable power technologies so the world's poorest can leapfrog over older, unsustainable and messy power-generation technologies.

[SV THIRD DAY]

Sometimes you have to ask are people ignorant or telling lies on purpose?
Hint...where does Climate Change rate in these polls of the American People?

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Indeed, the world's poorest are benefitting from cell technology that we invested in. This enabled them to leapfrog over the 'wired' home communications stage that we went through over the last century.

Now it's time for us to invest in better, more efficient, sustainable power technologies so the world's poorest can leapfrog over older, unsustainable and messy power-generation technologies.

Tell that to the Chinese Commies who are building a new Coal Power plant faster than this thread is growing. Want to fight Climate Change....fight the commies...oh...wait...the MMGW Cultists are the New Eco Commies..ha ha aha

Green is the new Red.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Unfortunately history is also ripe with civillisation collapses, also due to unforeseen developments, both environmental and of our own making. Jared Diamond's books are perhaps the best known recent works in this area, but the archiological and historic literature is extensive in this area. Heck, the Bible documents numerous civilization collapses.

Ronald Wright's A Short History of Progress is also an excellent read.
and listen.

It was the Massey Lecture in 2004.

The 2004 CBC Massey Lectures, "A Short History of Progress" - Home | Ideas with Paul Kennedy | CBC Radio