Support NeoGAF

[Lime]

A good overview of recent climate research and how there is much cause for alarm that demands that action needs to happen immediately

A 3.5 degrees C increase is considered to be the extinction point, because in such a world the food chain collapses, oceanic plankton dies off and these temperatures severely limit terrestrial vegetation (see also here). Horribly enough, the grasslands of the world that we use for agriculture are threatened the most. The extinction of species will create chaos in many of these grasslands – for example the disappearance of bees will create enormous problems with pollination (see here). The acidification of the oceans depletes the oxygen in the waters. Temperatures higher than the extinction point are being predicted, not by crackpots, ideologues of sci-fi writers, but by serious scientists. An increasing number of climate change scientists now fear that our situation is already so serious, and so many self-reinforcing feedback loops are already in play, that we are in the process of causing our own extinction. Some are convinced that we will run into major problems in the course of just a few decades from now (see here). Climate change is creating an emergency situation. Action needs to be taken immediately. And it needs to be right action. No carbon trading markets, no bowing to corporate power. Steep carbon taxes are essential.

For a long time, the ‘alarmists’ were not taken seriously. It seems to be changing now. Studies have shown that approximately 55 million years ago, a 5 degree C increase in global temperatures occurred in only 13 years. A scientific report published last year revealed that in the near-term, Earth’s climate will change 10 times faster than at any other moment in the last 65 million years. Science already shows that we are currently experiencing change 200 to 300 times faster than any of the previous major extinction events (see here).

The timeline of warnings

The reality of Anthropogenic Climate Disruption (ACD) continues to outstrip our ability to model worst-case scenarios, as it is happening so much faster than ever anticipated. Sixty-three percent of all human-generated carbon emissions have been produced in the last 25 years and science shows that there is a 40-year time lag between global emissions and climate impacts. This means that we have not even started to experience the consequences of our growing emissions (see here). In the meantime, nothing substantial, nothing efficient is happening to curb CO2 emissions.

Consider this timeline:

• “Late 2007:The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) announces that the planet will see a one degree Celsius temperature increase due to climate change by 2100.
• Late 2008:The Hadley Centre for Meteorological Research predicts a 2C increase by 2100.
• Mid-2009:The U.N. Environment Programme predicts a 3.5C increase by 2100. Such an increase would remove habitat for human beings on this planet, as nearly all the plankton in the oceans would be destroyed, and associated temperature swings would kill off many land plants. Humans have never lived on a planet at 3.5C above baseline.
• October 2009:The Hadley Centre for Meteorological Research releases an updated prediction, suggesting a 4C temperature increase by 2060.
• November 2009:The Global Carbon Project, which monitors the global carbon cycle, and the Copenhagen Diagnosis, a climate science report, predict 6C and 7C temperature increases, respectively, by 2100.
• December 2010:The U.N. Environment Programme predicts up to a 5C increase by 2050.
• 2012:The conservative International Energy Agency’s World Energy Outlook report for that year states that we are on track to reach a 2C increase by 2017.
• November 2013:The International Energy Agency predicts a 3.5C increase by 2035” (see here).

The political landscape and what's holding back action

The most-given answer to this question is interests and corporate power. The clear loser of Action is coal, which would see its investment fall by ca. $11 tr over the next 25 years. Gas investment would also fall, by ca. $ 3.4 tr (see here). The fossil fuel industry would basically go bankrupt and disappear – this is of course the ultimate goal of a carbon tax and the sooner it happens the better. Since the industry has extensive influence over many world governments, every move in this direction is being completely sealed-off. Politicians are being bought, either literally, or with a litany of crooked arguments about employment and the ‘craziness’ of leaving fuels in the ground. These merchants of death spend many millions on disinformation campaigns and many hundreds of millions on lobbying.

There is no doubt that this answer is correct, it is indeed trivial. But there are still other factors. As Heiner Flassbeck explained in another context a while ago: if we say ‘carbon tax,’ we say ‘government’ – a government which works for the majority of the population and, indeed, the world. This goes completely against the grain of what happened the last forty years. The conservative revolution transformed our countries into authoritarian pro-business states, which are not just undemocratic but inherently anti-democratic. The last thing these people want to is to give democratic power to the state that they cannot control, manipulate, make irrelevant or buy.

http://www.flassbeck-economics.com/how-climate-change-is-rapidly-taking-the-planet-apart/

 

[darkwing]

what a time to be alive

 

[SpaceWolf]

what a time to be alive

Not for many species of animals, I'm sure.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

 

[Alex_Mexico]

Meanwhile the country with the largest carbon footprint in the world next to China is seriously considering electing a global warming denier scumbag for president.

Great job, America!

 

[Guevara]

At least I got to see Rhinos and Polar Bears

I mean, in zoos but still

 

[thelatestmodel]

This is why I am considering not having children.

 

[Anoregon]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

By that point it will be way, way too late.

 

[Condom]

Many countries still need to go through their industrialization fase so expect things to get worse

 

[GK86]

Yeah, but record profits tho.

 

[The Iron Yuppie]

I'm glad to be with you, Samwise Gamgee, here at the end of all things.

 

[klonere]

A problem that was never going to be fixed without something like a global body with real legislative power in every country on earth.

Not a fixable problem, in essence.

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

By the time they take action it will be about building greenhouses and stuff for survival.

 

[gruenel]

At this point I'm convinced it's just a matter of time until we eradicate ourselves.

 

[Beartruck]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

When florida is wiped off the face of the earth they'll start looking into it earnestly. Human nature is Myopic, and a global disaster that takes a century to unfold shakes no one out of complacency.

 

[EatChildren]

Dumb fucking species couldn't even wait out the inevitable finite burnout of our own star before taking a scorched Earth policy to the entire goddamn planet.

 

[The Elite]

Am I reading this correct?

An extinction level situation by 2035?

 

[John Dunbar]

Science already shows that we are currently experiencing change 200 to 300 times faster than any of the previous major extinction events

is this true even for that giant asteroid that crashed in mexico?

 

[Replicant]

We deserve everything that is coming for us and then some more. Humans are greedy and selfish and inconsiderate of other species on this planet and even of each other. We think we can just take and take and not give anything back to the planet.

 

[bachikarn]

Am I reading this correct?

An extinction level situation by 2035?

I think climate change is a big deal, but I have a feeling this article is exaggerating the situation a bit

 

[Tuck]

Well that was thoroughly depressing.

 

[ahoyhoy]

It's terrifying and exciting that we could live to see the beginning of the end of our species, or at the very least modern civilization.

I think climate change is a big deal, but I have a feeling this article is exaggerating the situation a bit

Feelings Vs. Facts is what has helped get us into this mess in the first place.

I'd rather us overreact than underreact in either case.

 

[Nephtes]

The most-given answer to this question is interests and corporate power. The clear loser of Action is coal, which would see its investment fall by ca. $11 tr over the next 25 years. Gas investment would also fall, by ca. $ 3.4 tr (see here). The fossil fuel industry would basically go bankrupt and disappear – this is of course the ultimate goal of a carbon tax and the sooner it happens the better. Since the industry has extensive influence over many world governments, every move in this direction is being completely sealed-off. Politicians are being bought, either literally, or with a litany of crooked arguments about employment and the ‘craziness’ of leaving fuels in the ground. These merchants of death spend many millions on disinformation campaigns and many hundreds of millions on lobbying.

Serious question:
If the fossil fuel industry "disappears" as they say... How does the world work?
Or are we spelling the death of our current lives?

No fossil fuels mean many of the conveniences we take for granted (like plastics for cell phones and computers) disappear too...

No easy way to get across town without gasoline in the car... I guess we're walking to work?

I'm not being a climate change denier, I'm simply asking how everyone expects the population at large to react with government enforced eradication of how they've lived their lives for the entirety of my lifetime...

 

[Klyka]

Sure it destroyed the planet, but for one beautiful moment in time we created value for our shareholders

 

[Markoman]

Trump's next election campaign: make America colder again

 

[Palette Swap]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

This isn't about governments. In democracies where people vote for deniers, every single one of them is also responsible.

In 2016, denial should be a red line for voters.

 

[TatteredHat]

W...woohoo..!

 

[Lime]

Am I reading this correct?

An extinction level situation by 2035?

I think climate change is a big deal, but I have a feeling this article is exaggerating the situation a bit

You can both click on the article and click on the sources for the claims made.

Here: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Glob...egrees-C.-by-2035-International-Energy-Agency

and here: http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175785/tomgram:_dahr_jamail,_the_climate_change_scorecard/

 

[ahoyhoy]

Sure it destroyed the planet, but for one beautiful moment in time we created value for our shareholders

We need to etch this on the moon as the epitaph of our planet.

 

[UrbanRats]

Desertification will be excellent to stick our heads in the sand.

 

[Mistake]

So what can be expected in terms of consequences? Like a year by year time table. This summer has been extremely weird so far in the north east. There have been bouts of rain almost every day, while before it would shower a day or two at a time, once or twice a week.

 

[Orcastar]

I think climate change is a big deal, but I have a feeling this article is exaggerating the situation a bit

The prevalence of attitudes like this is why we have no hope of stopping this.

 

[Famassu]

Am I reading this correct?

An extinction level situation by 2035?

If some horror scenarios come true, maybe. The thing about ecological systems is, they might work fine (well, fine enough to support billions of humans & other animals) even when they are on the brink of total destruction. But then, once it goes past some limit, it all comes crashing down hard. We are screwed if(when) plankton in oceans start dying off en masse and some key areas of food production dry up.

 

[KrellRell]

The prevalence of attitudes like this is why we have no hope of stopping this.

You're right, his opinion is going to kill us all!!

 

[Lime]

Serious question:
If the fossil fuel industry "disappears" as they say... How does the world work?
Or are we spelling the death of our current lives?

No fossil fuels mean many of the conveniences we take for granted (like plastics for cell phones and computers) disappear too...

No easy way to get across town without gasoline in the car... I guess we're walking to work?

I'm not being a climate change denier, I'm simply asking how everyone expects the population at large to react with government enforced eradication of how they've lived their lives for the entirety of my lifetime...

The article talks about how change is possible and how it's only a question of political will to change our energy consumption to something less damaging.

 

[Kurdel]

We have dominated so many environments for so long, human extiction is is near impossible.

Our civilizations are seriously in danger though, I will give you that.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

They're going to wait until the problem is too far gone to fix.

 

[FyreWulff]

Serious question:
If the fossil fuel industry "disappears" as they say... How does the world work?
Or are we spelling the death of our current lives?

No fossil fuels mean many of the conveniences we take for granted (like plastics for cell phones and computers) disappear too...

No easy way to get across town without gasoline in the car... I guess we're walking to work?

I'm not being a climate change denier, I'm simply asking how everyone expects the population at large to react with government enforced eradication of how they've lived their lives for the entirety of my lifetime...

nationalization

 

[FreezeSSC]

Was the part about 2017 correct in the timeline?

 

[Orcastar]

You're right, his opinion is going to kill us all!!

When far too many of the people in charge share the same opinion, then yes, these opinions will indeed kill us all.

 

[ahoyhoy]

You're right, his opinion is going to kill us all!!

People think their opinions and feelings can trump decades of research and near scientific consensus.

This is a serious problem when half of the Western world shares this idea.

 

[Beren the Empty-Handed]

My words on my deathbed in 2035:

"At least I had Pokemon GO."

 

[Malreyn]

I wonder just how fucked we have to be for governments to actually take it seriously?

It'll be too late to do anything at that point when governments decide to do anything to fight climate change seriously...rather, governments will be more focused on fighting wars for depleting resources like livable/fertile land and water, etc.

 

[Nocebo]

Many countries still need to go through their industrialization fase so expect things to get worse

Not necessarily as generating power from sustainable power sources could be more convenient. Installing a couple of solar panels in/near a village is far easier than building power plants and a power line infrastructure.

 

[Altairre]

You're right, his opinion is going to kill us all!!

What kind of response is this?

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Last summer I was discussant for an academic panel on end of the world threats facing the 21st century. The outcome was that on the environmental front we've already passed several points of no return, and yet no action is likely to happen until unavoidable damage starts taking place - at which point there will be a great deal of finger pointing but not much left to be done.

 

[Sulik2]

Don't have kids people, their world is going to suck.

 

[Elandyll]

This is only the sign of a very weak President we're seeing here. Temperature goes up, temp goes down, it does whatever it wants because we're weak.
Very weak government.
I'd drive a very hard bargain with climate. Can't let it run amock, tremendous mistake. By the way, I've heard things about what Obama and Clinton have done along with climate, working against the American people's right for good weather during bbq and picnics. Or at the beach, at one of my tremendous resorts.
Note, Im not saying this, I've just heard it said.
Obama, Clinton, all being very secretive about that "climate" stuff. Something's weird here, I don't know what, but something.
And now, to bow to climate? We need to change our god given right to use our cars, our coal plants and our BBQ grills? You can quote me here, but after taking our guns, our Grills are next!
"Science"! Ah. Let me tell you about science... I know a lot about it, Im a huge scientist. Always been. But extinction? Bah! Nothing a good Trump ceiling fan can't solve here folks.
And now they want you to stop driving? After taking your guns and grills, they're about to take your car and compact it into a little book end cube.
Very sad.

 

[KrellRell]

When far too many of the people in charge share the same opinion, then yes, these opinions will indeed kill us all.

Good thing none of us are in charge then.

My main complaint is action. People love to talk around the subject, specifically bashing the nay sayers and "people in charge". What is the individual doing? It's a problem everyone wants to blame someone else for. In reality, no one wants to give up the comforts we have.

 

[Nephtes]

The article talks about how change is possible and how it's only a question of political will to change our energy consumption to something less damaging.

Which is?
I feel like I missed that part of the article.
All I read was that the world is dying and the only way to fix it is to tax the shit out of fossil fuels till they go away and put $192 trillion into research and hope that comes up with something?

Sounds like a Donald Trump speech, doom and gloom and no real solutions.