Jump to content

Suffering because of climate change?

Recommended Posts

And what evidence do you have that that will happen?

 

None, because the Government dare not even tax aviation fuel. There is no solution to climate change, other than reducing the population, and that is very unlikely too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
None, because the Government dare not even tax aviation fuel. There is no solution to climate change, other than reducing the population, and that is very unlikely too.

 

I'm not sure of the relevance of your first point and I think your second point is a bit defeatist.

 

There's three possibilities looking at this simply:

 

Don't do anything about climate change. Climate change happens due to human activity and kills many, economies collapse etc

Don't do anything about climate change, climate change doesnt happen we're all happy and no cost to world economies

Do do something about climate change, climate change doesn't happen we're all happy but there is a cost to world economies.

 

It is wise to risk the first merely to avoid the third?

Edited by TimmyR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And what evidence do you have that that will happen?

 

All of the above could result from diminishing supply of fossil fuels, surely heavy investment in renewable technologies, efficient homes, electric cars i.e. low CO2 infrastructure could well help keep the economy buoyant should the supply of fossil fuels become jeopardized.

 

As El Cid helpfully pointed out on the other thread, Norway is the a particularly heavy user of renewables. They spend £9 billion per year on renewable subsidies to get their electricity cost down to reasonable levels.

They have a gas (and oil) surplus.

The population of Norway is 5 million. £9 billion is almost £2000 per man, woman and child in the country. That's more than we spend on electricity and gas combined.

And that's with a system which still makes heavy use of fossil fuels.

 

Renewable energy is extremely expensive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_o...city_by_source

On top of that you have the completely unfunded need for a massive energy storage system for when it's neither windy (or too windy), nor sunny.

Energy storage is insanely expensive.

These costs are unavoidable. My predictions as to the personal financial consequences for the UK people are entirely justified.

 

The supply of natural gas is vast. The lithium for the batteries needed for the electric cars is likely to run out long before we run low on methane.

 

If you must reduce CO2, nuclear is the only practical way. It's only about twice as expensive as fossil and doesn't have an intermittency problem.

 

---------- Post added 31-07-2015 at 12:24 ----------

 

I'm not sure of the relevance of your first point and I think your second point is a bit defeatist.

 

There's three possibilities looking at this simply:

 

Don't do anything about climate change. Climate change happens due to human activity and kills many, economies collapse etc

Don't do anything about climate change, climate change doesnt happen we're all happy and no cost to world economies

Do do something about climate change, climate change doesn't happen we're all happy but there is a cost to world economies.

 

It is wise to risk the first merely to avoid the third?

 

This is a variant on Pascal's wager.

I think when you consider the scale of the costs involved, you'll see that the third is far more likely and far more devastating than you think.

 

But set that aside. We can switch to nuclear. It's expensive, but not economically devastating like renewables.

The fourth option: Spend a sensible amount of money over a reasonable period on something that we know will work.

If CAGW does turn out to be correct, we've lost far less and there's no great harm done.

 

How about a fifth: The increase in average global temperatures is due to AGW+nature. We spend vast amounts of money all but eliminating AGW and the temperature keeps rising (more accurately starts rising again since it's hardly budged in the last 20 years). This effect "kills many, economies collapse etc" and we can't cope because we spent all our money on wind farms and solar panels.

Edited by unbeliever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is wise to risk the first merely to avoid the third?

 

I do agree in green taxes, because they mean people may use cars less, and home insulation saves people money, and the fewer resources that we use, the better it is for biodiversity which brings great joys and helps keep the food chain stable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not sure of the relevance of your first point and I think your second point is a bit defeatist.

 

There's three possibilities looking at this simply:

 

Don't do anything about climate change. Climate change happens due to human activity and kills many, economies collapse etc

Don't do anything about climate change, climate change doesnt happen we're all happy and no cost to world economies

Do do something about climate change, climate change doesn't happen we're all happy but there is a cost to world economies.

 

It is wise to risk the first merely to avoid the third?

 

There are more than that

 

Do do something about climate change, go way over what is actually required, climate change doesn't happen, but the entire western world is impoverished for several generations.

 

Do do something about climate change, turns out it wasn't anthropogenic anyway and climate change carries on and happens anyway, oh, and we're all impoverished for several generations.

 

Or even do do something, turns out we don't really understand and we actually make the problem worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do agree in green taxes, because they mean people may use cars less, and home insulation saves people money, and the fewer resources that we use, the better it is for biodiversity which brings great joys and helps keep the food chain stable.

 

CO2 has nothing to do with biodiversity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CO2 has nothing to do with biodiversity.

 

You need to think a little deeper.

 

---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 09:09 ----------

 

Thousands of people have been killed by extreme weather so far this year and now scientists fear a weather event will cause droughts, wildfires, flooding, landslides and food shortages.

 

Australian scientists have warned of a “substantial” El Nino effect that started in May.

 

The phenomenon,which only happens every few years, is still in its early stages but has the potential to cause extreme weather around the world, according to the Bureau of Meteorology.

 

El Nino is the name given to above-normal temperatures in the Pacific Ocean that have the potential to cause devastating conditions around the world.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/thousands-of-people-killed-by-extreme-weather-so-far-in-2015-as-climate-change-feared-to-bring-more-heatwaves-hurricanes-and-floods-in-future-10345883.html

Edited by El Cid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You need to think a little deeper.

 

---------- Post added 05-08-2015 at 09:09 ----------

 

Thousands of people have been killed by extreme weather so far this year and now scientists fear a weather event will cause droughts, wildfires, flooding, landslides and food shortages.

 

Australian scientists have warned of a “substantial” El Nino effect that started in May.

 

The phenomenon,which only happens every few years, is still in its early stages but has the potential to cause extreme weather around the world, according to the Bureau of Meteorology.

ADVERTISING

 

El Nino is the name given to above-normal temperatures in the Pacific Ocean that have the potential to cause devastating conditions around the world.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/thousands-of-people-killed-by-extreme-weather-so-far-in-2015-as-climate-change-feared-to-bring-more-heatwaves-hurricanes-and-floods-in-future-10345883.html

 

What does this have to do with CO2 levels?

El Nino is weather, not climate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does this have to do with CO2 levels?

El Nino is weather, not climate.

 

The thread is about the consequences of climate change.

 

You accept that there has been warming, do you accept that warming causes more precipitation and extreme weather?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.