Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Latest IPCC Climate Change Report 14

Status
Not open for further replies.
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Sort by date Sort by votes
Martin_Rowson_on_the_IPCC_s_bleak_report_on_the_planet_s_future_r_odirnd.jpg


"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Problem is Greg... that it may not be made up and it could come to fruition... [pipe]

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Either way, rotting fruit.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Oh, some of it will happen no doubt. Other things will happen. Some things won't happen. One thing that won't happen is RCP 8.5, which the majority of the dire predictions in that political report are based on. If you think the population of Nigeria will increase from 200 million to 1.5 billion by 2100, then I suppose you agree with RCP 8.5. Personally I find that a rather strange idea, given that world population is likely to start to fall towards the end of the century.





Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It seems your mind is already made up, but RCP8.5 (they aren't called RCPs any more either...) is not at all "when the majority of dire predictions" occur. I mean sure, the excessively high emission scenario will have truly outrageous impacts. But the mid level scenarios are going to be truly dire and the low level scenarios are completely out the window now.

Warming of 1.5 to 2C will have severe, far reaching impacts on society and our civilization. The effects we're beginning to see are only going to get worse since we continue to do absolutely nothing. NOAA (a US gov't agency) released a report based off the IPCC models showing approximately 10" sea level rise for the US by 2050.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Population increase may tapering off, but with everyone chasing affluent Western lifestyles our average coefficient of destructiveness is still ramping up steeply.


"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Oh. My copy of the WG2 report must be corrupted, it mentions RCP 8.5 89 times, and RCP8.5 557 times, according to Chrome search. It mentions RCP 1265 times, so 8.5 is more than half the mentions of RCPs in the documents.

rcp_mentions_f0phdn.jpg






Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

I suspect the way things are going... it will exceed 4C.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
IRstuff said:
c) The only issue is that it's likely cheaper to import cheap oil and export our more expensive native oil
Click to expand...

Well, it's not just a CO2 equation for that point. It's also about lessening the effects on our economy and our industries as we get more "clean". It's also about national security. We don't want to be economically dependent on countries whose values are antithetical to ours. I'm specifically talking about Putin in Russia, woman's rights in the middle east, basic political freedoms in Venezuela.

dik said:
It's a lot more than that Josh... there will likely have to be a re-think on how energy is used... with some serious changes in the way we live.
Click to expand...

Yes, long term that will have to happen. I'm talking about short term movements in the right direction to build up some momentum.

GregLocock said:
yes but I think the changes were largely driven by legislation, not consumer preference.
Click to expand...
Some more legislation to force better fuel efficiency standards is probably needed sooner than later. But, there really is a consumer demand right now for more fuel efficient cars. Part of this is "virtue signaling" from rich folks. Part of it is just that Hybrids are genuinely nice cars now. And, there is a new generation of consumers that genuinely value ecological considerations in their purchase decisions.

I've personally decided that my next car (which is probably 5+ years away) will be a hybrid with certain features (AC in the seat, blind spot detection, etc) that I desperately wish my current car had. I rarely drive on the freeway and never tow anything. Therefore, acceleration and total horse power don't mean much to me anymore.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
time for some folks to get a cranialrectomy... deflecting the problem will not lessen it; it may aggrivate it. No one seems to be doing anything. Look at the world climatic events and the current problems. I don't think I'm an alarmist. If things don't turn out as bad as I think they will, I'll be happy to apologise. Another link:


Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dik -

The article hokie shared made some pretty good (and obvious) points. I particularly liked the following quote:

In service to green ideology, they made the perfect the enemy of the good
Click to expand...

I really don't understand how any sane person with even a basic understanding of energy production and CO2 emissions can be in favor of reducing the amount of nuclear energy in their state or country. The article point out how much Germany switched away from nuclear in the last 20 years or so. The same thing is happening here in California.

It's a delusional kind of environmentalism. We've got a very reliable and efficient means of producing carbon free energy. But, we refuse to use it because it's not "perfect".

That's my biggest frustration with the "green" folks in our politics and our society today. Objections to fracking and the KeyStone pipeline I understand. Those objections are consistent with their goals and their world view. But, trashing nuclear energy just doesn't make any sense to me.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think rather than legislation for specific products a carbon tax makes more sense as a motivator. It does at least capture the 'hidden' CO2 in alternatives to the standard solutions. There are problems with it in all sorts of ways, admittedly.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A carbon tax hits the lower income too harshly. Part of the real problem is the 'jetsetters' travelling around the world and having their own personal jets. This will have to stop, else a sliding carbon price where the first 5000 units is free (whatever a person needs to survive), everyone has and a sliding scale up to a huge amount for values above this... up to a huge amount in taxes. There has to be a huge disincentive to people burning carbon.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
We don't want to be economically dependent on countries whose values are antithetical to ours.
Click to expand...

I get that, but the reality is that God likes to play jokes on the "good guys," and for some reason critical resources seemingly reside mostly with people with those antithetical views. And while we might surely love to be energy independent vis-a-vis oil, our proven reserves would last us barely a decade at current consumption and importation
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It also shows who has the largest per capita carbon footprint...

Clipboard01_vhdzed.jpg


On a per capita basis the US has twice the carbon footprint of China and 10x the size of India...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I like the idea of a "carbon to live" threshold for a carbon tax. Roughly 1/3 of my easily calculated (ie at first glance) carbon footprint is air travel, entirely for pleasure. I can fly from Australia to Paris and back for US$1000, burning 2-4 tons of fuel in the process, depending on how many suckers they squish into coach. Diesel (aka jet fuel) at the pump is $2000/ton. Can anybody explain why any of that makes sense?


It's time to fly! Check out trips to these trending destinations:




Icon
PARIS
RETURN FROM $1,315*





Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
hokie66 said:
That just makes you an alarmist, dik, like John Kerry, Greta Thunberg, etc.
Click to expand...
There is nothing alarmist about standing on a racing Titanic and pointing out the iceberg dead ahead.

hokie66 said:
Michael Schellenberger makes a good case
Click to expand...
Not many take him seriously, except maybe a few who think that being contrarian is its own validation.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tmoose
  • Locked
  • Question
Discrepancies in climate risk models raise concerns 1
Replies
3
Views
78
TugboatEng
TugboatEng
Brian Malone
  • Question
Suggestion - forum title change? 5
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
GregLocock
GregLocock
SnTMan
  • Locked
  • Question
How the Climate Change Science Sausage Gets Made 5
2
Replies
31
Views
281
SnTMan
SnTMan
rb1957
  • Locked
  • Question
Climate science ... settled ? 1
2
Replies
23
Views
196
GregLocock
GregLocock
GregLocock
  • Locked
  • Question
Positive feedback in the global climate
Replies
1
Views
121
rb1957
rb1957

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top Bottom