keeping an eye on storms, climate and weather

[Wallaby]

Originally Posted by PLANET EXPRESS

How about this From five years ago, maybe the reason most storms went north in the Atlantic this year. (Knock on wood)https://www.google.com/amp/s/roberts.../10/10575/amp/

The more likely explanation is variation in solar activity (sun spots), which were explicitly excluded from IPCC studies until recently, and currently are 'averaged', effectively eliminating solar activity as a cause of climate warming/change. The solar impact on climate was pointed out several decades ago by Russian scientists, and ignored by the West.
Some interesting recent research from NASA (and others) explores solar activity and such phenomena as increased volcanic/tectonic movements, as well as ocean currents.

None of this is to say humankind does not affect the planet; however, there's a solar 'elephant in the room' that cannot be ignored.

[barnakiel]

Yes. The storms are about the norm in numbers but this year they oddly went either for New Orleans or else for Bermuda.


I noticed this too.


I watch tropical wx daily as I have clients sailing in the area. I think the situation is very interesting this year.


b.

[PLANET EXPRESS]

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/s...s-Climate.htmlWe are entering a solar minimum and they say in next couple decades could be grand solar minimum last one was 1660 little ice age. So by that shouldn’t we see falling temps? I would think so, yet seems to be rising.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Wallaby

The first six issues are indeed major problems. There is only one way to deal with them in the long term, which leads to issue #7. The 'fix' is population reduction; something NO ONE wants to talk about. Worse, the first six issues will only get worse as the world moves closer to Peak Population. Issue #7 becomes insolvable when politicized.

Population is a problem, but it is one with a solution in sight. The rate of population increase has been declining for decades now. We will peak in 30 to 80 years, depending on which model you believe. Either way, it is coming fast from a demographic perspective. After that population will decline. So yes, it's a problem, but one which is moving in the right direction.

World population in 2100 could be 2 billion below UN projections, new study says

The problem NO ONE wants to talk about is the intensity of resource use by those of us in the developed world. THAT is the problem we won't talk about because it requires us to do something meaningful. It requires all of us to use less.

But using less is something our culture can't even discuss. We always move to more. More energy, more material, more cars, more (and bigger) houses which use more resources.

Population is coming under control. What shows no sign of getting better is the amount of resources it takes to sustain the typical developed-world lifestyle. This is the real elephant in the room everyone ignores.

World's richest 1% cause double CO2 emissions of poorest 50%, says Oxfam

[Wallaby]

Originally Posted by PLANET EXPRESS

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/s...s-Climate.htmlWe are entering a solar minimum and they say in next couple decades could be grand solar minimum last one was 1660 little ice age. So by that shouldn’t we see falling temps? I would think so, yet seems to be rising.

Common sense would agree; however, it is not that simple. Solar activity affects multiple issues besides the obvious. Water currents will change dramatically, largely affecting weather patterns. Temps will increases in places and decrease elsewhere.


Regarding hurricane tracks, this is an eye-opener:
https://assets.climatecentral.org/im...5_s_c1_c_c.jpg

[Wallaby]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Population is coming under control. What shows no sign of getting better is the amount of resources it takes to sustain the typical developed-world lifestyle. This is the real elephant in the room everyone ignores.

World's richest 1% cause double CO2 emissions of poorest 50%, says Oxfam

To clarify: the UN Population Division expects world population, currently (2020) at 7.8 billion, to level out at or soon after the end of the 21st Century at 10.9 billion (the median line),[4][5] assuming a continuing decrease in the global average fertility rate from 2.5 births per woman during the 2015–2020 period to 1.9 in 2095–2100, according to the medium-variant projection. (wikipedia)



That said, those 7.8 billion --> 10.9 billion people all want your 'developed-world' quality of life. The current standard of living in the USA can be globally sustained for about 2 billion people. WHICH LEAVES POPULATION AS THE BIG PROBLEM, or a vast decrease in western living standards. Make your choice carefully.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Wallaby

To clarify: the UN Population Division expects world population, currently (2020) at 7.8 billion, to level out at or soon after the end of the 21st Century at 10.9 billion (the median line),[4][5] assuming a continuing decrease in the global average fertility rate from 2.5 births per woman during the 2015–2020 period to 1.9 in 2095–2100, according to the medium-variant projection. (wikipedia)

Yes, which is now being viewed as the upper end (see The Lancet connected article I cited). Regardless, population is within demographic sight of peaking and then declining.

So focusing on this as THE PROBLEM is a distraction. The problem, as highlighted in the Oxfam paper, is that we consume too much of the planet's resources. From the article:

The richest 10% of the global population, comprising about 630 million people, were responsible for about 52% of global emissions over the 25-year period, the study showed.
Globally, the richest 10% are those with incomes above about $35,000 (£27,000) a year, and the richest 1% are people earning more than about $100,000.

If 10% of the global population is responsible for 52% of global emissions, then adding or lowering population in the rest of the 90% doesn't really change that much.

Yes, everyone aspires to more, which is all the more reason why WE need to get our act together now. If we, who have had it all for so long, can't find a way to lower our impact on this planet, then why would anyone?

[barnakiel]

Yes.


It is very hard to find any valid grounds for asking a person in India or Congo to not have what we have.


But if everybody lives like an Americain or a European then that's that. There is not enough, and there is not enough space to store the rapidly consumed and discarded stuff.


China has stopped accepting EU rubbish some time back. Makes me think where they are sending theirs to?



We are eh. I will not say the word that is on my lips now.


;-)
b.

[barnakiel]

I have just discovered where China sends all their garbage. I have just been to the beach.


I will try to post images here if I take some tomorrow. If I cannot, I will post some of our earlier stock images.


Simple questions, simple answers.


b.

[Booysen]

The magnetic north shift +/- 50cm each year so eventually as it has always been over millions of years Change takes place! It is not new and will continue to do so until this planet is totally burned out ! So chill don’t bend to fear mongering by those that want to profit from it ! Now stop dumping plastic and over fishing by habitual offenders is more of a concern to me !

[alansmith]

Cat Keys, Yup, I have seen quite a few reports about the rising sea reeking havoc on parts of Miami already. Now with the loss of travel industry apartment and housing prices are beginning a descent as wealthy class divest themselves of luxury items.

Couple of quick points...Tesla is working on the development of the million mile battery. It is not in production yet...but hopefully within the next year. Currently the lith ion batteries are using cobalt and the range on a model 3 + model Y is approx 330 miles. They will be switching over to Nickel and ditch the cobalt.

Cat...your information is so outdated...smile....this year in California we decided to switch it up...we no longer need PG&E to pay huge bonuses to their chiefs...who deserved it really. My goodness they made the ledger sheets look so good by not spending money on maintenance of power grids. Smart smart pencil pushers....no, this year, Cat, we got creative and allowed Mother Nature...in a freakish display of lightning ...light us up. So, i just wanted you to have current (forgive the pun) information about batteries and power grids.

By the way...have you seen what has happened in China with their flooding? I see the view from your condo is quite lovely. Along the Yangtze River some of the areas have flooding all the way up to the 3-4 floors. Worst floods in generations. I don't know if there is enough money to fix our coastline problems as the seas rise. Polar bears are in extreme duress with sea ice falling apart so rapidly the bears can't hunt their natural prey the seals. Quite sad really.

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

So true. There are multiple paths to failure that we face as a global species. Rapid climate change is but one. Unfortunately rapid climate change exacerbates nearly all of the problems you list. This is why it is worth focusing on.

Mike,

Its the other way round also.

We have locked ourselves up into echo chambers in climate change, hardly any point talking about it.

The other points I make are tend to be more accessible to people. Discussing then helps us find common ground for action and understanding. And if we addressed those issues then there is a good chance something positive would be done about climate change as well.

On average we humans are not quite the AH’s we appear to he, but we get stuck in some grove. Most people are appalled at how we are treating Earth and want to do something. We just need some intelligent leadership who can guide us past the sticking points, to help us focus on areas where we largely agree.

Then again the chance of “intelligent leadership” seems a tad scarse these days. Im not seeing any here in the USA.

[Wallaby]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

So focusing on this as THE PROBLEM is a distraction. The problem, as highlighted in the Oxfam paper, is that we consume too much of the planet's resources. From the article:

I started out by saying the PROBLEM that no one wants to look at is population. That 'no one' includes CF members, by the way. There are but a few ways to reduce population, most of which are socially unacceptable. It is far easier, and socially acceptable, to point at 50% of pollution caused by 10% of the population. I don't disagree resource issues are important; however, if another species had such an adverse effect on the planet, humans would quickly take action.

The Lancet study for Pop Growth thru 2020 actually reveals far more than is stated, and discussed in the France24 'sound bite'. The original paper can be found here: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...677-2/fulltext WARNING: you will need a PhD with advanced statistics and forecasting models to understand the actual modelling.



Some issues that the study did not include, yet the study 'reveals':
Countries with slow/negative population growth are generally post-industrial, better educated, and have overall higher IQ (another problem no one wants to talk about because of social acceptability). Countries with high population growth are low-income ('3rd world'), often poor in natural resources, less educated, and have lower overall IQ. According to the study, China and Japan will be 50% less populated, while Nigeria is predicted to grow from 206 million (#7) to #2, at 791 million.
The study also does not include the effect of 3rd-world countries trying to industrialize to gain status and increase living standard. Technology in post-industrial countries (robotics etc) exacerbates the situation, keeping wages low, and taking away jobs. A global push for Universal Basic Income is a logical result. When added to the education and intelligence factors--The movie, Idiocracy is one conclusion.

Also avoided in the study is migration, currently underway. Again, this is a problem no one really wants to discuss.

[GordMay]

Speaking of populations ...

As species decline generation after generation, our idea of "normal" changes.
Is there an antidote to shifting baseline syndrome?
➥ https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org...line-syndrome/

[hpeer]

Well a big PART of the PROBLEM is that we need to start the journey in order to get anywhere. Which means we need to quit arguing about side trips and start taking steps.

The first steps will be tentative but build momentum, set the course. But we are squabbling at the starting line.

And there are things we can do individually. Our biggest contribution, besides living small in a warm climate (so we don’t burn calories to heat our bodies) is we bought some land. Now we are sitting on the land, no development, no clear cutting. It just sits there and sucks up our pollution and gives home to some critters.

Not all have the option to do that, but we all have the opportunity to do something.

And “something” includes supporting one another in our individual efforts.

If we are going to DO anything we have to quit fighting among ourselves.