Climate change policy

[Spectric]

OK, anyone else even notice the lack off PPE before it finished ?

You have to give it to them that they are on top of there game when it comes to PPE, how many of us have got something in our eye just by being in the workshop, well if we embraced these then maybe it would not happen, like having some flippers from a pin ball machine to deflect any approaching object.

 

[Superduner]

OK, anyone else even notice the lack off PPE before it finished ?

Hang on, I'll watch it again to check......

 

[Nick c]

Do we all have children and grandchildren.Do we realise what sort of world we are going to bequeath to them when we're six feet under.Do we think we know better than 95% of the world's climate scientists and the warnings they are telling us. Tipping points will be upon us all rich and poor young and old children and grandchildren. Vitriol towards one another will count as nothing if we can't find a way. sacrifices will need to be made but don't we think it worth it for the sake of our children and grandchildren and their children.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Do we all have children and grandchildren.Do we realise what sort of world we are going to bequeath to them when we're six feet under.Do we think we know better than 95% of the world's climate scientists and the warnings they are telling us. Tipping points will be upon us all rich and poor young and old children and grandchildren. Vitriol towards one another will count as nothing if we can't find a way. sacrifices will need to be made but don't we think it worth it for the sake of our children and grandchildren and their children.

For those who remember Corporal Jones in Dad's Army - Don't panic!!

Few civilisations in human history have dominated for more than a few hundred years - why should the industrial age be any different. 100 years is a very long lifetime covering ~4 generations. What may happen 500 or 1000 years from now is of no practical, but entirely academic interest

Tipping points occur when the impact of climate change is of a magnitude that recovery to an earlier state is implausible. This does not mean it happens suddenly. Examples:

Melting of the Greenland ice sheet could cause sea level rise of 23ft - catastrophic for a large part of the global population who disproportionately live close to the sea. However complete melt is estimated at several hundred to several thousand years.

Melting of the Antarctic sea ice could cause sea level rise of ~200ft. Timescales are completely uncertain - best estimates of melt over the next 200 years is for a 10ft rise.

For those countries economically and/or topographically vulnerable (eg: Bangladesh, some Pacific islands) changes could impact current inhabitants and/or very direct descendants.

Those fortunate to be economically relatively wealthy (eg: Europe, US) have the capacity to mitigate and adapt (mostly).

Climate changes more than ~100 years into the future will impact none that we will ever know.

If the prognosis for ice melt and sea level rise are correct, they will be as far removed from our current experience as stone age man or (possibly) the Roman empire.

If over the centuries or millennia global homo sapiens are reduced to just 10% of their current number this may be the best outcome for the long term survival of the species - it is our excessive numbers and exploitation of the environment that has caused its degradation anyway.

I write none of this out of complacency or lack of concern for those I leave behind - I support modifying behaviours to limit and slow negative change. There is a moral argument for those unable to help themselves, despite living in one of the wealthier global communities.

There are characteristics in common with the animal kingdom where individual species dominate, consume all local resources, followed by population collapse. For all our intellect we are simply animals who have over-exploited and outgrown our environment. Nature is operating normally!!

 

[TRITON]

Those fortunate to be economically relatively wealthy (eg: Europe, US) have the capacity to mitigate and adapt (mostly).

What is ironic about this is, those are the same group that is most vocal in a negative sense about immigration.

 

[TRITON]

This is a test

Test complete.

 

[Chris152]

For those who remember Corporal Jones in Dad's Army - Don't panic!!

Few civilisations in human history have dominated for more than a few hundred years - why should the industrial age be any different. 100 years is a very long lifetime covering ~4 generations. What may happen 500 or 1000 years from now is of no practical, but entirely academic interest

Tipping points occur when the impact of climate change is of a magnitude that recovery to an earlier state is implausible. This does not mean it happens suddenly. Examples:

Melting of the Greenland ice sheet could cause sea level rise of 23ft - catastrophic for a large part of the global population who disproportionately live close to the sea. However complete melt is estimated at several hundred to several thousand years.

Melting of the Antarctic sea ice could cause sea level rise of ~200ft. Timescales are completely uncertain - best estimates of melt over the next 200 years is for a 10ft rise.

For those countries economically and/or topographically vulnerable (eg: Bangladesh, some Pacific islands) changes could impact current inhabitants and/or very direct descendants.

Those fortunate to be economically relatively wealthy (eg: Europe, US) have the capacity to mitigate and adapt (mostly).

Climate changes more than ~100 years into the future will impact none that we will ever know.

If the prognosis for ice melt and sea level rise are correct, they will be as far removed from our current experience as stone age man or (possibly) the Roman empire.

If over the centuries or millennia global homo sapiens are reduced to just 10% of their current number this may be the best outcome for the long term survival of the species - it is our excessive numbers and exploitation of the environment that has caused its degradation anyway.

I write none of this out of complacency or lack of concern for those I leave behind - I support modifying behaviours to limit and slow negative change. There is a moral argument for those unable to help themselves, despite living in one of the wealthier global communities.

There are characteristics in common with the animal kingdom where individual species dominate, consume all local resources, followed by population collapse. For all our intellect we are simply animals who have over-exploited and outgrown our environment. Nature is operating normally!!

As I understand it, the problem with focus on rising sea levels as the ice caps melt is that it doesn't attend to the knock-on effects, such as impact on global sea currents, which in themselves can cause far greater damage to the lands we currently occupy.

 

[Nick c]

Tipping points by their nature are largely unknown quantities. And as you say are not immediate but are irreversible. Panic is probably what we need more of if it spurs us into meaningful action.no previous human civilisations have had the capacity to change the natural environment in the way that is currently happening.
Our descendents whether one two or more generations into the future will be suffering untold difficulties becos we have failed to act. I disagree that this will be one hundred or more years into the future.
If only we had the wisdom of the Iroquois and
"The Seventh Generation Principle"

 

[Jacob]

For those who remember Corporal Jones in Dad's Army - Don't panic!!

Few civilisations in human history have dominated for more than a few hundred years - why should the industrial age be any different. 100 years is a very long lifetime covering ~4 generations. What may happen 500 or 1000 years from now is of no practical, but entirely academic interest

Tipping points occur when the impact of climate change is of a magnitude that recovery to an earlier state is implausible. This does not mean it happens suddenly. Examples:

Melting of the Greenland ice sheet could cause sea level rise of 23ft - catastrophic for a large part of the global population who disproportionately live close to the sea. However complete melt is estimated at several hundred to several thousand years.

Melting of the Antarctic sea ice could cause sea level rise of ~200ft. Timescales are completely uncertain - best estimates of melt over the next 200 years is for a 10ft rise.

Other changes are happening now. https://www.theguardian.com/environ...dozens-of-impossible-heatwaves-studies-reveal
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/18/climate-crisis-world-temperature-target

For those countries economically and/or topographically vulnerable (eg: Bangladesh, some Pacific islands) changes could impact current inhabitants and/or very direct descendants.

Those fortunate to be economically relatively wealthy (eg: Europe, US) have the capacity to mitigate and adapt (mostly).

Utterly mistaken. We are all vulnerable in different ways.
Hurricanes, fires, floods seem to affecting wealthy nations and we don't seem to have mitigated or adapted in the slightest.
We are highly dependant on technology and also food imports. These could be disrupted very quickly. Takes a small scare to empty supermarket shelves in days, even in normal times.

Climate changes more than ~100 years into the future will impact none that we will ever know.

We are talking about the climate changes happening now.

If the prognosis for ice melt and sea level rise are correct, they will be as far removed from our current experience as stone age man or (possibly) the Roman empire.

Those are not the only issues, but you are wrong anyway - sea level changes are affecting parts of the globe already.

If over the centuries or millennia global homo sapiens are reduced to just 10% of their current number this may be the best outcome for the long term survival of the species - it is our excessive numbers and exploitation of the environment that has caused its degradation anyway.

that's OK then!

I write none of this out of complacency or lack of concern for those I leave behind - I support modifying behaviours to limit and slow negative change. There is a moral argument for those unable to help themselves, despite living in one of the wealthier global communities.

There are characteristics in common with the animal kingdom where individual species dominate, consume all local resources, followed by population collapse. For all our intellect we are simply animals who have over-exploited and outgrown our environment. Nature is operating normally!!

You have missed the point completely, which is that these things are within our control, just as we are the cause.
Interesting noting the changes in attitudes; no more sceptics saying no it's not happening, now they say yes it is happening but we can't do anything about it. They just need to make the next step!

 

[Terry - Somerset]

As I understand it, the problem with focus on rising sea levels as the ice caps melt is that it doesn't attend to the knock-on effects, such as impact on global sea currents, which in themselves can cause far greater damage to the lands we currently occupy.

True - there is a risk, in particular, of a change to the intensity of the Atlantic circulation which very directly impacts the climate in the UK and northern Europe.

It is also the case that a significant sea level rise could come from expansion due to increasing sea temperatures.

Just an opinion - genuine, concerted, intense, action to limit that which causes climate change awaits very clear unambiguous evidence of massively severe events before the general public will see it as a problem. Perceptions are that it will be very costly and reduce living standards.

Sadly it will by then be far too late to change the outcome!!

 

[Jacob]

True - there is a risk, in particular, of a change to the intensity of the Atlantic circulation which very directly impacts the climate in the UK and northern Europe.

AMOC is treated as a North Atlantic phenomenon but is inevitably linked to global currents. Worst forecasts say it could change in decades, not centuries.

It is also the case that a significant sea level rise could come from expansion due to increasing sea temperatures.

Just an opinion - genuine, concerted, intense, action to limit that which causes climate change awaits very clear unambiguous evidence of massively severe events

Massively severe events are happening already. See link already referred to.
The main obstacles to reform seems to be the fossil fuel industry and the right-wing media
I don't see the point of trying to talk it all down and ignoring the science.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Other changes are happening now. https://www.theguardian.com/environ...dozens-of-impossible-heatwaves-studies-reveal
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/18/climate-crisis-world-temperature-target

Utterly mistaken. We are all vulnerable in different ways.
Hurricanes, fires, floods seem to affecting wealthy nations and we don't seem to have mitigated or adapted in the slightest.
We are highly dependant on technology and also food imports. These could be disrupted very quickly. Takes a small scare to empty supermarket shelves in days, even in normal times.

We are talking about the climate changes happening now.

Those are not the only issues, but you are wrong anyway - sea level changes are affecting parts of the globe already.

that's OK then!

You have missed the point completely, which is that these things are within our control, just as we are the cause.
Interesting noting the changes in attitudes; no more sceptics saying no it's not happening, now they say yes it is happening but we can't do anything about it. They just need to make the next step!

However worthy your observation - and there is an element of truth in all you say - the blunt reality is that too little is actually being done to materially change the outcome.

Nor do I expect the rate to change materially until there is utterly unambiguous evidence that material degradation is happening and actually impacting folk in well endowed bits of the world who are responsible for the significant greenhouse gas emissions.

For instance - sea level is rising by 1-3mm a year - an inconsequential amount. Taken over 100 years it may have a material impact on those communities who cannot afford to adapt.

Mr & Mrs Average living in Birmingham (UK or US) worry about heating, job, car, family holiday - climate change is utterly inconsequential.

Just get real - politicians of all persuasions will do little until the general public upon who they rely for a vote to get into office implore them to do something about climate change.

The COP shambles evidences this - the first meeting was in 1995 30 years ago. This year the UK is sending 470 delegates. A testament to the hot air expended in both sending and discussing the issue evidenced by limited actions emanating from the meetings.