Skip to main content

View Diary: Advocates for Climate Action Again Understate Case -- Significantly (38 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  It was well past time when I was a teenager and (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mightymouse, A Siegel, George3

      first began telling my family and friends about AGW in the '50s. With sincere and due respect to your formidable advocacy, I submit that not even you, or Bill Mckibbean, or James Hansen are talking head-on about the facts in my sig. That is the real situation.

      Enough fossil fuel remains on Earth to warm it 6 degrees C by 2100 AD if it is all used. A +6 C planet will only sustain half a billion humans. Human population will rise to 9 billion by 2050. Any questions?

      by davidincleveland on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 07:22:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There is a challenge ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        davidincleveland, George3

        of 'how much do you scare people' and to what extent can you get them to look at reality without having them fall into drunken stupors and working to act to reduce the havoc.

        Dependent on 'adaptation' measures, far more than 500 million could be alive in +6C world or, well, far less. Reality: we don't want to be in that world ... or a +4C world and, well, we'd prefer to get back under a +.5C world (ASAP).

        I've sketched out discussion which might fall into the zone you're discussing and, well, perhaps owe it to myself to attempt to make these substantive enough to put into public. The horrid risk of tail-end risk analysis isn't talked about enough -- and, since I recognize that, i shouldn't contribute to that failure.

        Blogging regularly at Get Energy Smart NOW! for a sustainable energy future.

        by A Siegel on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 12:07:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Well said and considered. I and others would be (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          A Siegel, George3

          quite grateful to read your perspectives on the coming 'end times' for civilization as we now know it. For my own part, for over half a century I've known the likely things humans will do and suffer between now and 2100. We now have a forum where we can discuss my take, widely and very candidly.

          The likeliest path the species will take to 2100 is a discussion we need to have, in order to mitigate the extinction possibilities for our chosen 'offspring.' I deeply dread writing that diary. I suspect I won't be able to restrain my tears, both during the writing and while responding to comments. I'm going to write it before next Spring.

          Enough fossil fuel remains on Earth to warm it 6 degrees C by 2100 AD if it is all used. A +6 C planet will only sustain half a billion humans. Human population will rise to 9 billion by 2050. Any questions?

          by davidincleveland on Tue Dec 04, 2012 at 01:36:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  there can be no other way (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      A Siegel, George3

      the peer review process still acts as a bullshit filter and you cant throw it out. Manuscripts need to be written, and that remains to be something different than blogpost writing. And they need to be reviewed. And ultimately you can not make policy based on the unsettled apperances of the scientific moment.

      All the more, the policy that is made, for an issue like this, HAS to be seriously conservative and .. whats the word? playing it safe against surprises.

      So when the IPCC tells us that with x Gt emission we could just scratch by 2 degrees, then a serious climate policy would aim for maximally 0.5 x - to have a safety margin.

      I. e. regardless whats in coming reports, any sane climate policy today would have to aim for zero emissions in the shortest manageable time; since we already seem to have reached the 2 deg C emission budget.

      The "cautiousness vs realism" objection should be made against the politics, not the science. Politics fails it, not the science.

      In fact, it would be death for science if it would want to somehow "paint a picture" to make up for polictics´ shortcomings.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site