The engineering challanges of living with global warming 9

[sms]

Rather than continuing to hijack the thread on Saudi oil, I thought I would start a new thread...

Drillernic said in the Saudi Oil thread:

“However if anthropogenic global warming is fact, it may be too late to do anything about it when the arguments have finished, so perhaps the wisest course of action is to do something about CO2 emissions just in case?”

If my (perhaps pessimistic) friend moltenmetal is correct, then messing with CO2 emissions is a waste of time and effort. Perhaps we ought to take on the engineering challange to begin adapting human civilization to higher global temperatures, beginning by:

Start relocating pacific islanders.

Stop all development of the Florida peninsula

Start development of a New Orleans style water handling systems for London, New York, and other major cities…

Start relocating New Orleans inland.

Further development of drought resistant crops.

Although as certain parts of the globe become unlivable, migration will happen naturally.

What other engineering problems and solutions do you see as a result of adapting human civilization to higher global temperatures?



-The future's so bright I gotta wear shades!
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.

 

[rb1957]

"You know what... we've spent so much time talking about this issue now, and we have not got much further."

where do you want to get to ? we don't have the answers, just a bunch of questions and opinions ...

 

[electricpete]

Maybe just human nature. While it's arrogant for anyone here to think they have a glimmer of hope to change anyone else's opinion on such a polarized subject, I'm guessing that people on all sides experience some frustration that after carefully analysing and "explaining" (from the viewpoint of the explainer, but usually not the receiver) certain technical or political aspects of the discussion, others are not in the least swayed.

I had compiled a list of respectable organizations that tell us the same thing the IPCC tells us. NASA, NOAA, NAS, Hadley Center and a lot more. Most of these organizations that made their name outside of the global warming arena... they don't have to exagerate or sensationalize anything to retain their prestige. Many of these organizations have the biggest and the best climate models in the world. On the other side for the most part are smaller organizations and indvididuals who made their fame in the global warming debate and whose main contributions are criticizing the models of others, rather than presenting their own models. If you're the small kid in the block and want to get some attention, throw a stone at the big kid on the block. Seems to have worked so far.

The Hadley center publishes their results and methodology and uncertainty analysis in detail.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/hadleycentre/index.html

Where is the website on the other side that provides the model telling us we have nothing to worry about, and where is their uncertainty analysis?

=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.

 

[dcasto]

A model is just that, a model, not reality. The way we make emperical based models is to take known equations and refit them based on measured laboratory data. The problem is we do not have laboratory data. When you go to the lab you hold some of the variables constant so you can model how the others interact. We can not model the earth and global warming because we cannot create a lab like Scott Adams did. But we can get close with all kinds of assumptions, including wrong assumptions and man doesn't like to be told he is wrong.

The day the modelers can tell me the exact weather for my area is the day I'll beleive their other nature models. Meanwhile I'm sitting here in my home town in the northern hemisphere waiting on a an 18" snow storm just 25 miles away while the other model says its going to be just a wet slushy mix that would equal about 4" of snow, if it were solid.

As for all these centers, follow the money. They each stand to get grants to study stuff. Global warming is a fact, its just the root cause uncle Al is proposing is off a smidgin' in astophysical and geological terms.

By the way, where were all those hurricanes predicted last year? It looks more like a Monte Carlo similation is at work here to me.

 

[civilperson]

An optimum earth population with developed standards of living for all should be under four billion humans. Questions of how to convince 25% of the living to cease living and the rest to lessen procreation rates is a fair start on methods to cure anthrological climate change.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

The population is going to be reduced, one way or another. Anyone who looks at a poulation curve has got to be able to see this can't go on indefinately.

So, any volunteers for sterilization?

 

[dcasto]

Time for the ChemE's and Biotechs to create Soyant Green manufacturing plants.

 

[moltenmetal]

You don't need volunteers for sterilization or Soylent Green (made from people!). All you need is prosperity to be shared a fair bit better than it is now. When people stop feeling desperate and start to live a little, they tend to limit themselves to a couple kids to avoid cramping their lifestyle. No more need to worry about having enough kids so that a few live long enough to take care of you in your old age... The infertile ones, the ones who don't want kids, and the ones who die of disease, suicide or misadventure before reproducing take care of the rest. Voila- no more population explosion.

Unfortunately, we're all addicted to the geometric series pyramid scam called "economic growth". Global warming or no, you can't sustain that long term, period, unless you find us a few more planet Earths- and you can't keep up the illusion for any appreciable time without population growth. Declining birth rates are seen as a "problem" which needs to be solved by immigration etc.

Again- sucks to be our kids, especially if engineers aren't even smart enough to do the risk analysis properly on this one. And clearly we aren't- we'd rather just keep on doing what we're already doing until it's too late. So that's just exactly what we'll do.

 

[civilperson]

moltenmetal,
Prosperity is being shared in China and in India. The two great nations have advanced in wealth creation and raising the bottom average living standards. No slow down in population growth observed as of this time. Maybe ZPG is a North American phenomena.

 

[HgTX]

"The two great nations have advanced in wealth creation and raising the bottom average living standards."

What, the poorest of the poor in China and India are less poor than they used to be? Can you cite a reference for that?

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[regalia]

China and India are a loooonnnng ways from the living standard of the US and western Europe.

However, the largest cases of ZPG have in fact occured outside of north america. Japan has a high standard of living (much higher than china or india) and they actually have negative native population growth. Most of western europe also has close to ZPG. Any population growth is immigration.

China and India are still in the process of obtaining the goal, they are not there yet.

Population growth has and will continue to be the biggest social, economic, and environmental problem in years to come. The media loves to publish statistics like 'if everyone did their bills online they would save XX number or trees. Yet no one seems to be willing to acknowledge the danger of adding another 3-4 billion of us by 2050.

 

[davefitz]

regalia:
China and India do have a way to go to match current western living standards, but it is also likely true that western living standards will likely have to move in the direction of lower energy consumption per capita, which means closer to current Inda and China energy consumption . The tricky political issue is how to convince the public that their living standards are not being reduced.

The trend to allow more immigration is tied to the need for established domestic businesses to unsure a constantly increasing domestic market. If the native population is shrinking, there is then generated a strong demand by business to allow immigration to increase to make up the difference. For example, the current collapse in the housing market will be offset by the process of legalizing the 12 million illegals, who can then roll their earnings into mortgages and buy entry level houses. The negative aspect is the increased local consumption leads to more pollution and loss of undeveloped areas for wildlife habitat ant recreation.

 

[epoisses]

@hgtx

http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXT...68445~piPK:64168309~theSitePK:3079226,00.html