Global Warming Has Accelerated and Will Go On for Centuries

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Global Warming Has Accelerated and Will Go On for Centuries

Earth

According to the head of the UN World Meteorological Organization, global warming has not reached a standstill - in fact, it has accelerated. Our planet will continue to warm for centuries to come, with disastrous consequences.

On Monday, the UN World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) issued its annual statement on the Status of the Climate. UN weather agency chief Michel Jarraud spoke out against climate skeptics, stating that "There is no standstill in global warming," and pointing to some of the extreme climate events of 2013.

"The warming of our oceans has accelerated, and at lower depths," Jarraud said. "More than 90% of the excess energy trapped by greenhouse gases is stored in the oceans.

"Levels of these greenhouse gases are at a record, meaning that our atmosphere and oceans will continue to warm for centuries to come. The laws of physics are non-negotiable."

Droughts, heat waves, rising seas, floods and tropical cyclones around the globe last year are just a glimpse of what may be coming in the future, the WMO's statement pointed out.

While skeptics point to natural phenomena like volcanoes or the El Niņo or La Niņa weather patterns as an explanation for the observed warming and disasters, Jarraud rejects their arguments. "Many of the extreme events of 2013 were consistent with what we would expect as a result of human-induced climate change," he said, pointing to the destruction wreaked by Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines.

Other 2013 examples that Jarraud pointed to were huge bush fires in Australia, winter freezes in the US south-east and Europe, heavy rains and floods in north-east China and eastern Russia, snow across the Middle East and drought in south-east Africa.

Source: News24

Permalink

Many will point to natural occurences and be told to shut the hell up, for example when the big smokey bastard erupted in Iceland and much of Europes travel via air was halted for a time, the volcanoe significantly reduced the emissions for the period by outputting less greenhouse gases than the travel for the period would have.

What climate skeptics fail to realize is that NOBODY WANTS THIS TO BE REAL! But it is. So instead of denying that the problem exists we should do something about it.

At this point, our only hope for avoiding catastrophic climate change is some sort of technology to scrub carbon dioxide out of the air, since let's be honest we're never going to give up on oil and gas fast enough otherwise. Renewables are being adopted at a fairly slow rate, nuclear fission is unpopular for understandable reasons (though I personally quite like it) and nuclear fusion is still decades away from being economically viable. Whatever happens, humanity will live on to fight another day, but it's going to hit us hard if we don't act soon :-/

The White Hunter:
Many will point to natural occurences and be told to shut the hell up, for example when the big smokey bastard erupted in Iceland and much of Europes travel via air was halted for a time, the volcanoe significantly reduced the emissions for the period by outputting less greenhouse gases than the travel for the period would have.

I try to stay out of this conversation because its such a big deal and I'm a hard sell on what we really know about weather vs. human existence, and the other factors in our world. I don't say no, and that we shouldn't care about taking care of things but I do say I'm a wait and see kinda guy. Besides all I heard this winter was "this is how winter used to be about 15 years ago and people forget".

Adam Jensen:
What climate skeptics fail to realize is that NOBODY WANTS THIS TO BE REAL! But it is. So instead of denying that the problem exists we should do something about it.

Yeah, this is one of the reasons why I find Jeremy Clarkson to be annoying.

I mean, he is still pretty entertaining about 70-80% of the time, but he should just STFU about the environment, politics, women, or anything even remotely serious.

OT: Hydrogen cars seem to be coming along decently. I'm not sure of the specifics, but they seem to be pretty viable alternatives to what we have today. And seeing how their only emission is water, they'd be fantastic for the environment as well.

Not sure how much gasoline alone contributes to global warming, but I'd bet it's a fairly significant amount.

JoJo:
At this point, our only hope for avoiding catastrophic climate change is some sort of technology to scrub carbon dioxide out of the air, since let's be honest we're never going to give up on oil and gas fast enough otherwise. Renewables are being adopted at a fairly slow rate, nuclear fission is unpopular for understandable reasons (though I personally quite like it) and nuclear fusion is still decades away from being economically viable. Whatever happens, humanity will live on to fight another day, but it's going to hit us hard if we don't act soon :-/

Yeah I've been thinking about this idea of a CO2 scrubber, we should patent it; a construct with a high surface area mostly suspended in mid-air. Ideally with a long lifetime - say several decades per unit. How cool would it be if they were self-replicating?!

The UN is a political organisation so this guy hyperboles it a bit, but yeah it's not a surprise that whatever's going on is not going to just magically stop.

I see no reason to worry though. If we can cause it, we can reverse it.

A single molecule of certain inorganic emissions contributes to the greenhouse effect what hundreds, if not thousands of CO2 molecules could. How the hell do you go about fixing something like that?

I'm not saying that we shouldn't be making an effort to switch to renewable energy sources and what not, but thinking about the damage that has been done is just scary.

The White Hunter:
Many will point to natural occurences and be told to shut the hell up, for example when the big smokey bastard erupted in Iceland and much of Europes travel via air was halted for a time, the volcanoe significantly reduced the emissions for the period by outputting less greenhouse gases than the travel for the period would have.

I'm a little mystified by this. What are these people suggesting? That we don't have to worry because volcanoes will halt air travel and reverse the warming trend? If that's the case, then "shut up" and maybe "the adults are talking" might be the most tactful responses those people deserve, but there has to be more to it than that.

Volcanoes are short-term events, the eruptions that can impact climate are too rare to halt the trend in the long term, the ash and gasses pose a far greater health and economic hazard per day of exposure than the consequences of warming, and there are better ways to reduce emissions from air traffic anyway.

Whenever someone comes out with stuff like this I want to ask them outright, "So are we just fucked at this point no matter what we do, or is there a deadline we ought to be aiming for?" Because they always make it sound like it's literally hopeless, yet we still ought to be trying to fix it. Pick one, guys.

Meh i have like 60 years tops left and considering that global warming is a very slow process and it will take a while for the worst to come i guess i just do not care. Even if we all went green right now we would not see any improvements within our lifetimes so i guess what i am trying to say screw your children and let them deal with the floods droughts and wars.

sir neillios:

JoJo:
At this point, our only hope for avoiding catastrophic climate change is some sort of technology to scrub carbon dioxide out of the air, since let's be honest we're never going to give up on oil and gas fast enough otherwise. Renewables are being adopted at a fairly slow rate, nuclear fission is unpopular for understandable reasons (though I personally quite like it) and nuclear fusion is still decades away from being economically viable. Whatever happens, humanity will live on to fight another day, but it's going to hit us hard if we don't act soon :-/

Yeah I've been thinking about this idea of a CO2 scrubber, we should patent it; a construct with a high surface area mostly suspended in mid-air. Ideally with a long lifetime - say several decades per unit. How cool would it be if they were self-replicating?!

Heh, trees are all well and good but there isn't enough free land surface for them to make the significant reduction we need, especially as we'll need even more farmland as our population continues to grow to 8 or 9 billion strong. That and when trees die and decompose, guess where most of that carbon stored ends up? Right back in the atmosphere, they aren't a permanent solution. Storing carbon dioxide deep underground seems like the best option to me.

McMullen:

The White Hunter:
Many will point to natural occurences and be told to shut the hell up, for example when the big smokey bastard erupted in Iceland and much of Europes travel via air was halted for a time, the volcanoe significantly reduced the emissions for the period by outputting less greenhouse gases than the travel for the period would have.

I'm a little mystified by this. What are these people suggesting? That we don't have to worry because volcanoes will halt air travel and reverse the warming trend? If that's the case, then "shut up" and maybe "the adults are talking" might be the most tactful responses those people deserve, but there has to be more to it than that.

Volcanoes are short-term events, the eruptions that can impact climate are too rare to halt the trend in the long term, the ash and gasses pose a far greater health and economic hazard per day of exposure than the consequences of warming, and there are better ways to reduce emissions from air traffic anyway.

No the suggestion they tend to put forth is that the volcanoe does more damage than a few weeks of human air travel, which is absolutely not the case, by a few orders of magnitude.

JoJo:

sir neillios:

JoJo:
At this point, our only hope for avoiding catastrophic climate change is some sort of technology to scrub carbon dioxide out of the air, since let's be honest we're never going to give up on oil and gas fast enough otherwise. Renewables are being adopted at a fairly slow rate, nuclear fission is unpopular for understandable reasons (though I personally quite like it) and nuclear fusion is still decades away from being economically viable. Whatever happens, humanity will live on to fight another day, but it's going to hit us hard if we don't act soon :-/

Yeah I've been thinking about this idea of a CO2 scrubber, we should patent it; a construct with a high surface area mostly suspended in mid-air. Ideally with a long lifetime - say several decades per unit. How cool would it be if they were self-replicating?!

Heh, trees are all well and good but there isn't enough free land surface for them to make the significant reduction we need, especially as we'll need even more farmland as our population continues to grow to 8 or 9 billion strong. That and when trees die and decompose, guess where most of that carbon stored ends up? Right back in the atmosphere, they aren't a permanent solution. Storing carbon dioxide deep underground seems like the best option to me.

There is so much land near me used for "farmland" that has absolutely nothing growing or grazing on it.

I've always wondered, and perhaps someone could enlighten me, but could a lot of our global warming problems be mitigated by planting a shit load of trees? Like, on every spare strip of land that can support them? They take CO2 out of the atmosphere and put oxygen in, isn't that what we're after?

EDIT: Never mind, just saw the post directly above this one :s

Steve the Pocket:
Whenever someone comes out with stuff like this I want to ask them outright, "So are we just fucked at this point no matter what we do, or is there a deadline we ought to be aiming for?" Because they always make it sound like it's literally hopeless, yet we still ought to be trying to fix it. Pick one, guys.

Among scientists, the current discussion is: "Alright, we already fucked up the climate and there's no stopping it at this point, so what can we do to make it less bad?"

Unfortunately, scientists are rarely policymakers, very few policymakers are scientists or even have proper scientific training, and many policymakers are wasting time in a fruitless discussion about whether it's even possible to have an impact on the climate.

Steve the Pocket:
Whenever someone comes out with stuff like this I want to ask them outright, "So are we just fucked at this point no matter what we do, or is there a deadline we ought to be aiming for?"

Kind of, what it comes down to is do you want a dick up the ass or 12? Would you at least like some lube? And would you prefer your fucking to come from a human dong or an elephant?

Edit: I see someone got in before me, but I feel a phrased things far more elegantly.

As long as short-term profits thanks to inaction based on denial are high enough, nothing will be done, simple as that. Unfortunately, it'll be quite a while before major corporations start feeling the pain and a market-based change will become feasible. A lot of suffering will have to occur before that, especially in poorer regions that already suffer from rather harsh weather conditions. We'll simply build deichs, if it comes to that. We can keep this up for several decades more. Oh, food will be a little more expensive, insurance premiums will go up, some people will lose their homes. But overall, we'll be alright for a very long time. Meanwhile, huge portions of the world will suffer and only once it gets to be too expensive in the short-term will we actually change our policies. Our markets are ultimately self-destructive because of these messed-up incentive structures where long-term survival is not part of the goals anymore, only short-term benefit is.

The chemical reaction that causes carbon to be released when fuel is burned is a reversible one. The issue is that you'll have to put way more energy into creating fuel from the CO2 already in the air then you'll ever get out of burning the fuel in the first place. If we were able to generate a huge amount of surplus energy, we could take the CO2 out of the air and turn it back into fuel which could then be used to power cars and such. Of course the hard part is producing a massive surplus of energy, but if we nail down fusion or maybe geothermal power, we might be able to pull it off. Using this method, we could reduce the carbon in a controlled manner and keep it at whatever levels we need to stabilize the climate.

This is just me toying with conjecture though, I've no idea what roadblocks might make the whole idea bunk.

Nimcha:
The UN is a political organisation so this guy hyperboles it a bit, but yeah it's not a surprise that whatever's going on is not going to just magically stop.

I see no reason to worry though. If we can cause it, we can reverse it.

You are naive my friend. just because we have the ability to reverse it, doesn't mean the political or societal will exists. Do you think people would give up their cars and airplanes and power stations to change something that's not all that tangible? I mean, if you're in a cage with a lion, you'll give up your steak dinner, but here you can't see the lion coming, and by the time you do, it's too late.

Of course WE will be fine, we've been kicking the sea's ass for over 70 years. We'll just build some more dikes.

And then Fox News will do a segment where they forgo any scientific or peer-reviewed research and instead point at some snow and go "See?! Global warming doesn't exist because it's cold right now!"

The White Hunter:

No the suggestion they tend to put forth is that the volcanoe does more damage than a few weeks of human air travel, which is absolutely not the case, by a few orders of magnitude.

Ah. In that case they've got it backwards; volcanoes usually cause temporary pauses in warming because their plumes tend to be better at reflecting solar radiation into space than trapping heat in the atmosphere. The trend is usually reestablished within a few years as if nothing happened though.

Floppertje:

Nimcha:
The UN is a political organisation so this guy hyperboles it a bit, but yeah it's not a surprise that whatever's going on is not going to just magically stop.

I see no reason to worry though. If we can cause it, we can reverse it.

You are naive my friend. just because we have the ability to reverse it, doesn't mean the political or societal will exists. Do you think people would give up their cars and airplanes and power stations to change something that's not all that tangible? I mean, if you're in a cage with a lion, you'll give up your steak dinner, but here you can't see the lion coming, and by the time you do, it's too late.

Once people's feet get wet, things will get done.

Or if people start to lose money.

Electricity production causes 1/3 of the greenhouse gas production, with Coal being the biggest offender and Natural Gas being a fairly close second (especially if you factor in methane leaks). If we switched every coal and natural gas plant to nuclear (as France did, in the same time frame as France did) this problem would be solved.

And if you think nuclear is worse in any metric than coal or natural gas (other than being slightly more expensive overall), then you've been fed some bad information.

Zykon TheLich:

Steve the Pocket:
Whenever someone comes out with stuff like this I want to ask them outright, "So are we just fucked at this point no matter what we do, or is there a deadline we ought to be aiming for?"

Kind of, what it comes down to is do you want a dick up the ass or 12? Would you at least like some lube? And would you prefer your fucking to come from a human dong or an elephant?

Edit: I see someone got in before me, but I feel a phrased things far more elegantly.

I will then keep in mind for all future discussions that dick jokes = elegance.

Nimcha:

Floppertje:

Nimcha:
The UN is a political organisation so this guy hyperboles it a bit, but yeah it's not a surprise that whatever's going on is not going to just magically stop.

I see no reason to worry though. If we can cause it, we can reverse it.

You are naive my friend. just because we have the ability to reverse it, doesn't mean the political or societal will exists. Do you think people would give up their cars and airplanes and power stations to change something that's not all that tangible? I mean, if you're in a cage with a lion, you'll give up your steak dinner, but here you can't see the lion coming, and by the time you do, it's too late.

Once people's feet get wet, things will get done.

Or if people start to lose money.

And that's the point where it's too late. Of course people's feet are already getting wet. But that's in places like Bangladesh and who cares about poor people? I'd guess that once places like New York and London start to feel damp, they'll take some half-assed preventative measures (and paint anyone who wants to do more as a hippy-communist)rather than implement structural changes. Apart from the political shenanigans, it's going to take more than Europe and the US to get aboard (no pun intended), you'll need places like Russia, China and India too, and they're even less concerned with the environment than we are.

I'm really not seeing the problem with large climate change/global warming. Well, to be more accurate, I really can't see why people keep kicking up a fuss over it. We'll either adapt to it like everything else on Earth will, or we'll die. Once that's done, the Earth will normalize and something vaguely like us may evolve once more, or something will evolve to take our place as the apex species in the warmer and wetter climate (woo, dinosaurs making a comeback!).

It's really not something to be overly worried about.

There needs to be some kind of government subsidy that helps cover the cost for people who want to buy solar and wind based electrical generators to help power their homes in order to reduce individual carbon footprint. Hell, if that happened I'd go out and buy as many as I could. Make my house self-sufficient as hell.

Alternative power supplies will go a long way towards mitigating this, but as it has already been said they've been a long time coming and will continue to be a long time coming.

So...Futurama was right. What we need is nuclear winter to cancel out global warming.

But seriously...

Agayek:
I'm really not seeing the problem with large climate change/global warming. Well, to be more accurate, I really can't see why people keep kicking up a fuss over it. We'll either adapt to it like everything else on Earth will, or we'll die. Once that's done, the Earth will normalize and something vaguely like us may evolve once more, or something will evolve to take our place as the apex species in the warmer and wetter climate (woo, dinosaurs making a comeback!).

It's really not something to be overly worried about.

This pretty much sums up my thinking as well. People are so afraid of change even though we have no idea how this change will affect things. In the long run, humanity really isn't any more or less important than the millions of other species that have come before, during and after.

Well this has totally changed my mind about driving to school everyday...Or not,I remember these sort of articles were really big before the great economic shitstorm of 07-08.
Although I coundnt be less bothered about this sort of article when it has been a thing for at least 30 years to scare people with a scary claim wait some time and another scary article comes along and scare people.

A friend of mine made a remark about the old GW. She said that it should no longer be called Global Warming, but Global Pittsburghization. This is due to the fact that the actual weather at large is becoming fairly bi-polar (no pun intended) and unpredictable...which means that there has been pretty much no significant change in my town at all. We get all the weird weather as is, and no amount of climate change has altered this fact. So, who's with me? Change the title to Global Pittsburghization?

And yet environmentalists continue to drive cars, fly in planes, use computers, eat animal products, build with lumber, use gas-powered heaters, and channel utilities from conglomerate sources with the rest of us ignorant plebs.

Lead the way, Sergeant.

Climate change denial is ridiculous. I notice climate change every day I walk from the city into the nearby park, and the air gets colder. Cities are noticeably warmer than natural surroundings. Now, look at those night time images of Earth from orbit. See all those lights? What you see it human urban development, visible from SPACE.

You think all those hundreds of millions of ovens, stoves, air conditioners, motors in civilization are not going to make a difference? As I said, I can feel the difference by walking 200 meters.

And all of this doesn't even take the burning fuel and accumulating greenhouse gases into account, which according to scientists are the much bigger factor.

Jupiter065:
Electricity production causes 1/3 of the greenhouse gas production, with Coal being the biggest offender and Natural Gas being a fairly close second (especially if you factor in methane leaks). If we switched every coal and natural gas plant to nuclear (as France did, in the same time frame as France did) this problem would be solved.

And if you think nuclear is worse in any metric than coal or natural gas (other than being slightly more expensive overall), then you've been fed some bad information.

No. They've been fed This. It doesn't matter that the only fatalities were due to the earthquake and the tsunami. The [b]idea[/i] is scary and we could all be radioactive!

Or Terrorists! They'll have a nuclear bomb that we can never get rid of.

For real.

I don't really believe global warming, not because of idealogy, but rather I don't trust scientists who only stand to gain from panic, with research grants and publicity, with pretty much every bizzare weather being claimed as global warming.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here