The Global Warming thread.

[GoCubsGo]

Once again, desperate Useless flails about with gibberish just so he can post after me in a thread. Childish.

Do we need a Global Worming Thread?

Got one:
viewtopic.php?p=160201#p160201

Deposited that post where it belongs.

More de-wormer, please.

Ivermectin boy.

[Vrede too]

(post: childish gibberish)
(signature: obsessed butthurt )

Awww. , Useless. So much for "Ignored". You fail again. Plus, Useless, you've been busted too many times for anyone to believe you're not reading my posts, anyhow. It's just your excuse for cowering. Awww.

[Vrede too]

"And it's going to get worse unless dramatic action is taken, two studies published this week forecast."

I don't know why they keep saying that. Aingonnabe no "dramatic action."

Did you miss the "unless..." part?

Useless fails comprehension, again.

I didn't miss it - I criticized it. There isn't going to be any "unless". Only a relatively few will make any meaningful effort, and that won't be enough. I say quit writing stuff like there's any expectation of "dramatic action."

This retains a little bit of hope, very little. It mostly supports your fatalism.

IPCC: Window to avert catastrophic climate change is quickly closing

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on Monday released its latest report, which found that nations are falling short of their pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order to avert catastrophic climate change. While the technology exists to stay below 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) of average global temperature increase — the goal that virtually every nation agreed to in the 2015 Paris climate agreement and reaffirmed last year in the Glasgow Climate Pact — current policies put the world on a trajectory toward at least twice as much warming....

Just operating the existing fossil fuel infrastructure — the oil and gas wells and pipelines, the coal mines and the coal- or gas-fired power plants for the rest of their natural lives — puts 1.5°C out of reach. And if every currently planned fossil fuel project is completed, it would only guarantee that the world warms more than 2°C. To stay below 1.5°C, the use of coal must be virtually eliminated by 2050, according to the IPCC, and oil use must decrease by at least 60% and gas by 45%.

The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment in 2014 predated two notable shifts that were central to the latest report: the increasingly universal agreement in the scientific community that 1.5°C is the threshold for triggering devastating and irreversible effects of climate change, and the increasing prevalence and awareness of methane emissions. Methane is a long-overlooked but powerful greenhouse gas, and emissions of it are rapidly rising as natural gas displaces coal and demand for meat grows. (Methane is emitted when natural gas leaks instead of being burned, and it is a byproduct of the digestive process of farm animals.) The IPCC states that fast, deep cuts to methane emissions are essential to getting warming mitigation on target.

To stay below 1.5°C, carbon dioxide emissions must fall by 48% by 2030 and by 80% by 2040; methane emissions must fall by 34% by 2030 and 44% by 2040....

Solid numbers to measure our ineffectiveness against.

[O Really]

I'd challenge those who are still in the "if something isn't done" group to provide one example from the start of mankind when all the major world countries collaborated on anything significant. Then look at the response to covid - a worldwide, clear and present danger, killing people all over and running amuck. Everybody was pretty much in the same boat, against a common enemy/danger, and where a global response could have gone a long way to solve or manage the issue. Did we get it? No, we did not. We didn't even get an effective response within the inside of many countries, including the US. So with climate issues being longer horizon, less understandable, and requiring more effort/expense to address, does anybody think there's any chance of "drastic action"? Not me.

And then consider who would lead such action? Certainly not the US, that can't even get its own act together and generally won't do what anybody else wants done anyway. Not Canada, too small and with different issues. Not China. Puleeze. Not India, Not Russia or the collective 'Stans. What has come out of the vaunted "G20" related to climate issues. A couple of "harrumphs" maybe.

Nagonna happen. The Earth will fry. Nice to be old.

[Vrede too]

I'd challenge those who are still in the "if something isn't done" group to provide one example from the start of mankind when all the major world countries collaborated on anything significant.

rstrong educated us on the likely prevention of our extinction due to CFCs and the destruction of the ozone layer:
viewtopic.php?p=78366#p78366

Then look at the response to covid - a worldwide, clear and present danger, killing people all over and running amuck. Everybody was pretty much in the same boat, against a common enemy/danger, and where a global response could have gone a long way to solve or manage the issue. Did we get it? No, we did not. We didn't even get an effective response within the inside of many countries, including the US.

I'd quibble a bit. The response has not been perfect, but there was stunning rapidity with vaccine development and delivery, and millions of lives have been saved. It's the US that stands out with its organized COVIDiocy.

Plus, effective climate action is more US govt dependent than dependent on state and individual action, whereas the bulk of US COVIDiocy has come from individuals and some states.

So with climate issues being longer horizon, less understandable, and requiring more effort/expense to address, does anybody think there's any chance of "drastic action"? Not me.

You could be correct that it's too little too late.

And then consider who would lead such action? Certainly not the US, that can't even get its own act together and generally won't do what anybody else wants done anyway. Not Canada, too small and with different issues.

Agreed, so far.

Not China. Puleeze.

I think China already is an sustainable energy leader.

Not India, Not Russia or the collective 'Stans. What has come out of the vaunted "G20" related to climate issues. A couple of "harrumphs" maybe.

The report make that case.

Nagonna happen. The Earth will fry. Nice to be old.

Could be.

[Ulysses]

I'd challenge those who are still in the "if something isn't done" group to provide one example from the start of mankind when all the major world countries collaborated on anything significant. Then look at the response to covid - a worldwide, clear and present danger, killing people all over and running amuck. Everybody was pretty much in the same boat, against a common enemy/danger, and where a global response could have gone a long way to solve or manage the issue. Did we get it? No, we did not. We didn't even get an effective response within the inside of many countries, including the US. So with climate issues being longer horizon, less understandable, and requiring more effort/expense to address, does anybody think there's any chance of "drastic action"? Not me.

And then consider who would lead such action? Certainly not the US, that can't even get its own act together and generally won't do what anybody else wants done anyway. Not Canada, too small and with different issues. Not China. Puleeze. Not India, Not Russia or the collective 'Stans. What has come out of the vaunted "G20" related to climate issues. A couple of "harrumphs" maybe.

Nagonna happen. The Earth will fry. Nice to be old.

How did you get to be such a cock-eyed optimist?'

[Vrede too]

... Nagonna happen. The Earth will fry. Nice to be old.

How did you get to be such a cock-eyed optimist?

Either Useless can't spell 'cockeyed' or he's calling you a dick, O Really.

[neoplacebo]

It's like the "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" concept. If all you think about is dicks, all things start with "cock."

[Ulysses]

It's like the "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" concept. If all you think about is dicks, all things start with "cock."

Only if you have a perpetually dirty mind...
'

[O Really]

How did you get to be such a cock-eyed optimist?'

Sarcasm noted. But it's not a matter of optimism or pessimism - it's straight realism, of which there is very little in our plastic information-distorting world. For example, again today:

UN: The globe is headed to ‘unlivable’

Climate report calls for rapid mitigation steps

Doyle Rice and Dinah Voyles Pulver

USA TODAY

The time for talk has passed and the time to act is now, according to a new United Nations report on how to curb the worst consequences of climate change.

Rapid mitigation measures – reductions in fossil fuels and better building practices – are needed to avoid unsustainable global warming, according to the report.

In fact, the report says, without immediate and deep emission reductions across all sectors, limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius is “beyond reach.”

Chances of "immediate and deep emission reductions across all sectors..." - absolutely and totally nil, zilch, nada. So either the report is wrong or the earth will fry. A lot of people will choose to believe the report to be wrong, leftist propaganda, political yammer, or even just well-intentioned overkill and do nothing. As Vrede pointed out earlier, " effective climate action is more US govt dependent than dependent on state and individual action" but even so, is the US Congress going to get together in the next millenia and pass effective laws? As if.

For anyone who thinks there is still some chance, no matter how small of "drastic action," or "rapid mitigation measures," try to envision what that would look like IRL. Who would have to do what to get that accomplished? In the US, are the Republicans going to support anything a Dem president wants, even if it's in their own best interest? Nope, not in this century. Is a Republican president going to take the lead in cutting carbon emissions? Even less likely. Is the US going to follow the leadership of some other country? Like that has happened never.

The earth is going to fry. Good time to be old.

[Ulysses]

There you go again...

Now, can't you just look on the bright side?

Chances are nuclear Armageddon will wipe out most life on the planet, so it then can return to a kinder, gentler climate.

[Vrede too]

... Nagonna happen. The Earth will fry. Nice to be old.

How did you get to be such a cock-eyed optimist?'

Either Useless can't spell 'cockeyed' or he's calling you a dick, O Really.

My bad, sort of. While the song was never misspelled in South Pacific, one can find misspellings like in Useless' video link or these lyrics where the word is oddly misspelled in the title but not in the lyrics.

[Vrede too]

It's only April.

Emergency declaration for multiple wildfires in New Mexico

Also Arizona and Nebraska. Ut-oh.

[GoCubsGo]

This is a bit of great news that's been drowned out by recent events.

California runs on 100 per cent clean energy for the first time

[Vrede too]

This is a bit of great news that's been drowned out by recent events.

California runs on 100 per cent clean energy for the first time

Electricity, which is great, and I'm glad to see that they're not counting nuclear as clean/renewable. However, there are also California's 14M+ autos running on their housing and transportation systems designed to discourage energy efficiency.

[Vrede too]

... The earth is going to fry. Good time to be old.

NM is still burning, over a month now.

...

Climate change is why New Mexico's wildfire season started early this year


The McBride Fire burns in the heart of the village in Ruidoso, N.M., on April 12.

... Scientists say that this is not just a freak occurrence but rather the new normal caused by climate change.

“We’re really seeing an increase in these fires outside the normal summer season, the normal warm season, really across the West,” Kaitlyn Weber, a data analyst at the research organization Climate Central, told Yahoo News....

“We had the big Marshall Fire in December in Colorado, we had the Big Sur fires here in California in January. [Fires] have just been happening throughout the year,” Weber said....

“Parts of New Mexico, Texas, and Southern California have experienced some of the largest increases in fire weather days each year,” the report’s summary stated. “Areas of New Mexico are now seeing two more months of fire weather than was the case nearly a half century ago.”

“As climate change continues to warm our Earth, it increases temperatures across the landscape,” Weber said. “It causes this drying trend that’s really happening throughout the Southwest. So we’re seeing warm temperatures, drier days and, if the winds pick up, really dangerous conditions.”

The drying out of New Mexico — a February study in the journal Nature Climate Change found that the last 20 years were the driest two decades in at least 1,200 years — is largely responsible....

Other states throughout the West have also been with megafires in recent years. A 2016 study from Climate Central found that, “Across the Western U.S., the average annual number of large fires (larger than 1,000 acres) burning each year has more than tripled between the 1970s and the 2010s.” Last summer, wildfires ravaged Washington state, Oregon and British Columbia, Canada.

In February, a United Nations report declared a “global wildfire crisis” is developing due to climate change, pointing to recent extreme fire outbreaks in countries such as Australia and even in Russian towns north of the Arctic Circle....

U.S. wind and solar energy hit a key benchmark last month: Report

The United States electricity sector reached an important milestone in April, when wind and solar energy accounted for 20% of electricity generation for the first time in history, according to the London-based global energy think tank Ember.

The 20% figure is noteworthy because the International Energy Agency calculates that to avert catastrophic climate change, wind and solar energy need to reach one-fifth of global energy production by 2025.

U.S. wind and solar energy production typically reaches its highest annual output in April. Spring is the windiest time of year on average, and the sun shines strongest in the spring and summer. Last April, wind and solar accounted for 17% of U.S. electricity, which was the all-time high until last month.

U.S. wind and solar energy have grown dramatically in recent years, primarily due to dropping costs. For 2021 as a whole, wind and solar created 14% of U.S. electricity, up from just 6% in 2015.

, but should have and would have been 50% or more if not for our assholes and idiots.

... America is not alone in experiencing its wind and solar boom. In 2021, wind and solar were the fastest-growing sources of energy worldwide for the 17th year in a row, according to Ember. Globally, wind and solar doubled their share of electricity production to 10% between 2015 and 2021.

Russia and Saudi Arabia are happy that it hasn't been faster.

The Biden administration is enthusiastically promoting wind and solar energy production as part of its agenda to combat climate change. The Department of the Interior is leasing offshore wind turbines, and the president’s Build Back Better legislative agenda includes billions of dollars in subsidies for solar panel production and purchases.

There are, however, potential impediments on the horizon. Much of the recent wind energy boom has occurred on the windy plains of the Midwest, where local governments worried about loss of farmland are beginning to restrict local renewable energy development. President Biden’s energy agenda is stuck in the Senate, where opposition from Republicans and Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia has stymied its passage.

, senator from King Coal.

... Still, renewables are growing and will continue to do so; the only question is by how much. On March 29, wind was the second-largest source of electricity in the U.S. in a 24-hour period for the first time. And on April 3, California set a record when its power grid briefly ran on 97% renewable energy....

[Vrede too]

These Apocalyptic Photos Show Just How "Critically Low" Water Levels Are In The American West

One example:

... 20. No, this is not a major international canal. It's a line of houseboats in a depleted Lake Oroville (NoCal).

[neoplacebo]

A giant earthen dam in Oroville gave way a few years ago. No idea if it was part of this particular water system. Or the ass end of it.

[Vrede too]

A giant earthen dam in Oroville gave way a few years ago. No idea if it was part of this particular water system. Or the ass end of it.

Same lake created by the same dam. Near collapse in 2017, but it held:

Oroville Dam crisis

NoCal has been in a drought since.

[Vrede too]

SoCal is screwed, too.

Wind, drought combine to make western US fires unstoppable

The flames of a northern New Mexico wildfire have become unstoppable as the largest blaze in the U.S. burns trees sucked dry of moisture over decades of drought amid a forecast Thursday of more winds expected to fan the blaze, according to wildfire fighting managers.

Meanwhile, winds in Southern California sent embers flying in the coastal community of Laguna Niguel on Wednesday. More than 20 homes were destroyed, many of them multimillion-dollar mansions. No injuries were reported.

The California fire was much smaller than the New Mexico blaze that has burned at least 170 homes, but Brian Fennessy, chief of the Orange County Fire Authority, said drought and climate change have combined to make fires that were once easy to contain extremely dangerous for people and property

From New Mexico to Colorado and parts of the Midwest, forecasters on Thursday issued red flag warnings of extreme wildfire danger because of low humidity levels, erratic winds and warm temperatures. The same combination of weather conditions have contributed over the last month to much worse than normal spring wildfires in the U.S. ...

Wealth is a poor defense against global warming.