Climate Change - General Discussion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-05-2017, 01:16 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
"Climate change will alter the ecosystems that humanity depends upon in the coming century. But given the complexity of the living world, how can you learn what may happen? A team of Australian scientists has an answer: miniature ecosystems designed to simulate the impact of climate change. The experiments are already revealing dangers that would have been missed had researchers tried to study individual species in isolation."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/11/scien...ign=buffer
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2017, 02:32 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
"Alaska’s soils are taking far longer to freeze over as winter approaches than in previous decades, resulting in a surge in carbon dioxide emissions that could portend a much faster rate of global warming than scientists had previously estimated, according to new research."

" 'A lot of models were predicting this thawing would happen, but not for another 50 to 100 years – we didn’t think it would happen this quickly,' said Roisin Commane, researcher at the Harvard John A Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences and lead author of the report, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/slow-...ign=buffer
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2017, 03:34 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
"US scientists who have been warning that warmer oceans are more likely to be poorer in dissolved oxygen have now sounded the alarm: ocean oxygen levels are indeed falling, and seemingly falling faster than the corresponding rise in water temperature. That colder water can hold more dissolved gas than warmer water is a commonplace of physics: it is one reason why polar seas are teeming with marine life and tropical oceans are blue, clear and often relatively impoverished. In 2013, an international consortium of marine scientists warned that oxygen levels in the oceans could fall by between 1% and 7% by the century’s end. And this could, other scientists predicted, lead to what they politely called 'respiratory stress' for some marine life."

http://climatenewsnetwork.net/ocean-oxyg...ign=buffer
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2017, 04:22 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
"State and local legislatures in the United States are experimenting with new ways to target the topics taught in science classes, and it seems to be paying dividends. Florida’s legislature approved a bill on May 5 that would enable residents to challenge what educators teach students. And two other states have already approved non-binding legislation this year urging teachers to embrace ‘academic freedom’ and present the full spectrum of views on evolution and climate change. This would give educators license to treat evolution and intelligent design as equally valid theories, or to present climate change as scientifically contentious."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic..._POLE_NEWS
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2017, 07:40 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(12-05-2017 12:25 AM)morondog Wrote:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timescape

Just put this one in my shopping cart. It sounds pretty twisted.Smile

"Men willingly believe what they wish." -Julius Caesar
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2017, 07:46 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
"Early last year, the Great Barrier Reef in Australia underwent a once-in-a-lifetime calamity. Ocean temperatures around the reef rose far above normal. The extra heat turned corals bone-white and caused them to expel the symbiotic algae which feed them from inside their branches. Overcooked, starving, and vulnerable to disease, vast swaths of the world’s largest reef died. The summer of 2016 remains one of the most severe coral bleaching and die-off events ever observed—a level of devastation that scientists didn’t expect to see until the 2050s."

"The actual stated commitments of the Paris Agreement put the world on track for 3.4 degrees Celsius of warming. To have a good shot at avoiding 1.5 degrees of warming, the world would have to halt all carbon emissions by 2021, according to the U.K.-based think tank Carbon Brief. (Without the halt, we won’t actually reach the 1.5 degree threshold for a couple more decades, but by 2021 there will be enough carbon in the atmosphere to lock us in for that warming.)"

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch...at/526641/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2017, 11:12 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
It's all bad news Sad

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
15-05-2017, 11:52 PM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(15-05-2017 11:12 PM)morondog Wrote:  It's all bad news Sad
You see, that's why I don't really mind the concept of geoengineering. I know there are legitimate concerns about the adverse effects that come from altering the atmosphere, but at least some of the people endorsing it acknowledge climatological and social realities. To me, anyone proposing that we can overcome climate change through carbon offsetting alone - even if we assume that we can magically turn off CO2 tomorrow - isn't really taking climate activism seriously.

"Men willingly believe what they wish." -Julius Caesar
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Kaneda's post
16-05-2017, 12:05 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(15-05-2017 11:52 PM)Kaneda Wrote:  
(15-05-2017 11:12 PM)morondog Wrote:  It's all bad news Sad
You see, that's why I don't really mind the concept of geoengineering. I know there are legitimate concerns about the adverse effects that come from altering the atmosphere, but at least some of the people endorsing it acknowledge climatological and social realities. To me, anyone proposing that we can overcome climate change through carbon offsetting alone - even if we assume that we can magically turn off CO2 tomorrow - isn't really taking climate activism seriously.

If we do go the geo-engineering route, for it to be effective we will have to *know* that it'll work, and it will require buy in from pretty much the whole world. The conditions for that to happen will be when everyone acknowledges that climate change is an immediate threat - unlikely in the near future. I think that killing the fossil fuel economy is the immediate and possibly achievable aim, if the idiots at the top take this shit seriously.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
16-05-2017, 03:24 AM
RE: Climate Change - General Discussion
(15-05-2017 11:52 PM)Kaneda Wrote:  
(15-05-2017 11:12 PM)morondog Wrote:  It's all bad news Sad
You see, that's why I don't really mind the concept of geoengineering. I know there are legitimate concerns about the adverse effects that come from altering the atmosphere, but at least some of the people endorsing it acknowledge climatological and social realities. To me, anyone proposing that we can overcome climate change through carbon offsetting alone - even if we assume that we can magically turn off CO2 tomorrow - isn't really taking climate activism seriously.

According to climatologist Michael Mann's book The Madhouse Effect, most geoengineering schemes either won't work or are too expensive to work. We would need trillions of mirrors in space at the estimated cost of $350 trillion to reflect the necessary fraction of sunlight. The injection of sulfate particulates in the upper atmosphere would warm up some areas faster as well as cool others, so we could end up with worse droughts. It would also worsen acid rain and interfere with the ozone layer, and would have to be maintained for hundreds of years. Fertilizing the oceans with iron to create more algae to take up CO2 would only temporarily remove it, and would end up just cycling CO2 in the upper ocean rather than burying it deep in the oceans.

Mann says that sucking the carbon out of the atmosphere is the best geoengineering possibility. It would cost $500 per ton, but costs would come down with an economy of scale.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Thoreauvian's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: