By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
“We had our chance to make incremental changes, but that time is over. Only a root-and-branch transformation of our economies and societies can save us from accelerating climate disaster.
“It is a tall, and some would say impossible, order to reform the global economy and almost halve greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, but we must try,” she said. “Every fraction of a degree matters: to vulnerable communities, to ecosystems, and to every one of us.”
This is the UN, our best and brightest and traditionally our most cautious in publicising the scale of the problem, and even they are telling us that we have missed the boat on the stuff we were all bulsh!tting each other about 10 years ago, and now it will be so much harder to survive.
The only chance for our natural environment and most of our children to survive is to dump competitive capitalism now (it's the best and last opportunity we'll get) and prosper by having our target as good health for us and the rest of the Earth system.
We need to dump the growth mantra immediately, redistribute existing wealth now, and try to reduce our population in as acceptable a way as possible.
Do you know who the real wrong'uns are though? People who sit in the road.
In all seriousness, because this is deadly serious, people really need to wake up and realise how fundamentally screwed we are without serious action starting yesterday. We do not have time to transition nicely off oil and gas.
The outcome if we don't will make the war in Ukraine seem trivial.
2. there is no chance of Russia or China being interested.
3. Short of genocide Im really not sure how you get a population decrease in the next 10 years so that our carbon emissions are greatly reduced by 2030.
I do agree however that all our focus - nationally, business wise and individually should be on sustainability. Look to live a frugal life that reduce what we consume, heat, eat. And to make sure that the rich are taxed in a way that supports the bottom end of society. Whether that will be enough to avert global warming I don't know.
Sadly some of the biggest countries and powers in the world are in such a rogue state and attitude that I can't see how as a world we pull together.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:07 - Oct 27 by nodge_blue
Three problems with your final paragraph....
1. there is no national wealth only debt.
2. there is no chance of Russia or China being interested.
3. Short of genocide Im really not sure how you get a population decrease in the next 10 years so that our carbon emissions are greatly reduced by 2030.
I do agree however that all our focus - nationally, business wise and individually should be on sustainability. Look to live a frugal life that reduce what we consume, heat, eat. And to make sure that the rich are taxed in a way that supports the bottom end of society. Whether that will be enough to avert global warming I don't know.
Sadly some of the biggest countries and powers in the world are in such a rogue state and attitude that I can't see how as a world we pull together.
I mean 'wealth' in the loosest of senses, including things like land reform and the sharing of produce on a needs basis, rather than stockpiling for profitable trade.
We can't wait until Russia and China are ready. We have to set an example, and not care a sh!t about giving them an 'advantage', after all we had the advantage originally, not that anybody should be thinking in selfish or recriminatory terms now, there's no time.
The population thing is probably the hardest, isn't it? Education is the preferred route, but famine, drought and pandemics are always there if we can't manage it ourselves.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:07 - Oct 27 by nodge_blue
Three problems with your final paragraph....
1. there is no national wealth only debt.
2. there is no chance of Russia or China being interested.
3. Short of genocide Im really not sure how you get a population decrease in the next 10 years so that our carbon emissions are greatly reduced by 2030.
I do agree however that all our focus - nationally, business wise and individually should be on sustainability. Look to live a frugal life that reduce what we consume, heat, eat. And to make sure that the rich are taxed in a way that supports the bottom end of society. Whether that will be enough to avert global warming I don't know.
Sadly some of the biggest countries and powers in the world are in such a rogue state and attitude that I can't see how as a world we pull together.
Underreporting of emissions by China is one of the biggest issues, along with release of methane by runaway melting ice. Neither of which we can do anything about (Beijing is not going to be shamed into reducing its dirty output).
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:22 - Oct 27 by Guthrum
Underreporting of emissions by China is one of the biggest issues, along with release of methane by runaway melting ice. Neither of which we can do anything about (Beijing is not going to be shamed into reducing its dirty output).
The slightly unexpected peak in methane is not entirely understood as yet from what I read. It could be from agricultural land or wetlands, but it could also potentially be from permafrost or undersea methane clathrates. It could be signs of a very serious positive feedback loop being well underway.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:29 - Oct 27 by NthQldITFC
The slightly unexpected peak in methane is not entirely understood as yet from what I read. It could be from agricultural land or wetlands, but it could also potentially be from permafrost or undersea methane clathrates. It could be signs of a very serious positive feedback loop being well underway.
That latter is what I understood to be happening. Which is very serious.
I suppose the only way you could mitigate it might be to paint pollution-darkened icecaps white again (reflects heat, reduces melting rates).
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:29 - Oct 27 by NthQldITFC
The slightly unexpected peak in methane is not entirely understood as yet from what I read. It could be from agricultural land or wetlands, but it could also potentially be from permafrost or undersea methane clathrates. It could be signs of a very serious positive feedback loop being well underway.
It is hugely depressing.
I don't understand why our scientific efforts aren't much more focused on trying to look at carbon capture. Elon Musk would be much more respected if he stopped looking at Mars and started looking at the Earth.
They have said for a while that Methane gas could well be released in huge quantities in this current loop of warming conditions.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:38 - Oct 27 by Guthrum
I believe so, if those are the deposits trapped in or under the ice, now being released by melting.
Oh dear, that's not good.
Clathrates are cages made of ice with methane trapped in them. I remember reading about them as an undersea phenomenon, but they might use the same term in the permafrost on land.
Tim Flannery thought that undersea release was less likely in the short term due, I think to the thermal inertia in the interface between the ocean and the sea floor. One immediate consequence of a runaway release undersea could be tsunamis in unpredictable places, as the ice provides some structural integrity to the sea floor.
I guess its more likely to be coming from permafrost given the huge record temperature jumps in the last couple of years in the northern sub-arctic regions. Either case is terribly bad news, given that methane is 40 times more potent a greenhouse gas than CO2.
Hopefully it's a limited or localised collapse or something a little different.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:18 - Oct 27 by NthQldITFC
I mean 'wealth' in the loosest of senses, including things like land reform and the sharing of produce on a needs basis, rather than stockpiling for profitable trade.
We can't wait until Russia and China are ready. We have to set an example, and not care a sh!t about giving them an 'advantage', after all we had the advantage originally, not that anybody should be thinking in selfish or recriminatory terms now, there's no time.
The population thing is probably the hardest, isn't it? Education is the preferred route, but famine, drought and pandemics are always there if we can't manage it ourselves.
The cost of fuel crisis is a blessing in disguise when it comes to global warming. I imagine a huge chunk of Europe haven't even turned their heating on yet this year.
We do need to go cold turkey on fossil fuels and then invention out of necessity fills a gap.
I don't say that to excuse inaction. I'm all for giving it everything we've got starting right now but it's impossible. Only some sort of miracle technology can save us now.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:49 - Oct 27 by NthQldITFC
Oh dear, that's not good.
Clathrates are cages made of ice with methane trapped in them. I remember reading about them as an undersea phenomenon, but they might use the same term in the permafrost on land.
Tim Flannery thought that undersea release was less likely in the short term due, I think to the thermal inertia in the interface between the ocean and the sea floor. One immediate consequence of a runaway release undersea could be tsunamis in unpredictable places, as the ice provides some structural integrity to the sea floor.
I guess its more likely to be coming from permafrost given the huge record temperature jumps in the last couple of years in the northern sub-arctic regions. Either case is terribly bad news, given that methane is 40 times more potent a greenhouse gas than CO2.
Hopefully it's a limited or localised collapse or something a little different.
That's the problem, it has the potential to become a runaway feedback loop of melting releasing greenhouse gas which then increases the temperature and melting rates - if we are not already beyond that point, as somebody I was talking to at the weekend opined. If so, the volumes of methane release would far outweigh anything like farming.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:45 - Oct 27 by nodge_blue
It is hugely depressing.
I don't understand why our scientific efforts aren't much more focused on trying to look at carbon capture. Elon Musk would be much more respected if he stopped looking at Mars and started looking at the Earth.
They have said for a while that Methane gas could well be released in huge quantities in this current loop of warming conditions.
Musk is interested in the spectacular. Besides which, launching rockets is a far easier and more achievable task. Carbon capture technology is in its infancy.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 14:02 - Oct 27 by Guthrum
Musk is interested in the spectacular. Besides which, launching rockets is a far easier and more achievable task. Carbon capture technology is in its infancy.
Nature provides very good methods of carbon capture but we're intent on chopping them down because we like burgers.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:53 - Oct 27 by J2BLUE
We have already lost.
I don't say that to excuse inaction. I'm all for giving it everything we've got starting right now but it's impossible. Only some sort of miracle technology can save us now.
This. The planet is doomed and not enough people (or the top people causing the issues, big business, China etc.) are interested in doing anything/enough... and won't be until it's too late (if they ever will).
All I can do as I near 50 is think that I'm lucky I wasn't born later. I haven't particularly chosen not to have kids, but it's kind of a blessing in disguise.
I'll keep washing out the yogurt pots but honestly, what's the point?
Trust the process. Trust Phil.
0
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 14:23 - Oct 27 with 1854 views
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 14:14 - Oct 27 by The_Flashing_Smile
This. The planet is doomed and not enough people (or the top people causing the issues, big business, China etc.) are interested in doing anything/enough... and won't be until it's too late (if they ever will).
All I can do as I near 50 is think that I'm lucky I wasn't born later. I haven't particularly chosen not to have kids, but it's kind of a blessing in disguise.
I'll keep washing out the yogurt pots but honestly, what's the point?
Same as you, I'm so glad I haven't got kids.
Most of us are focussed on things like Ukraine, cost of living, Covid. It seems to me that we're a bit like someone who's frightened of the mouse they're staring at, when there's a great big hungry lion right behind them.
I'm getting a little less angry at the people who have given up though.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:53 - Oct 27 by J2BLUE
We have already lost.
I don't say that to excuse inaction. I'm all for giving it everything we've got starting right now but it's impossible. Only some sort of miracle technology can save us now.
Yep. We're in damage limitation territory and knowing human nature we're not going to be very good at that either.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:59 - Oct 27 by Guthrum
That's the problem, it has the potential to become a runaway feedback loop of melting releasing greenhouse gas which then increases the temperature and melting rates - if we are not already beyond that point, as somebody I was talking to at the weekend opined. If so, the volumes of methane release would far outweigh anything like farming.
Lovelock's book The Revenge of Gaia is a couple of decades old now, but I think he identified six major positive feedback subsystems, of which these are two.
1. Subsea methane clathrates giving up their methane as ocean temperatures rise. 2. Permafrost melting as snow cover reduces, reducing albedo, again releasing methane. 3. Layering in the ocean reducing the amount of algae growth and 'pumpdown' of carbon. 4. Decomposition of dying forest and algae releasing CO2 5. Boreal forest expansion, absorbing heat again melting ice to release methane (but also absorbing carbon, dunno how that balances). 6. Tropical forest and rainforest losing its ability to self-regulate, dying and losing us a carbon sink. Amazon particularly.
Add to that
7. Ongoing, slow forest fires which we now see happening in high latitudes (again methane from the ice plus CO2, also layering the surface with soot and again reducing the albedo)
...and who knows what else, and you have a vulnerable planet which protects us, but which we are doing nothing to protect.
Even I'm getting tired of doing this. on 13:45 - Oct 27 by nodge_blue
It is hugely depressing.
I don't understand why our scientific efforts aren't much more focused on trying to look at carbon capture. Elon Musk would be much more respected if he stopped looking at Mars and started looking at the Earth.
They have said for a while that Methane gas could well be released in huge quantities in this current loop of warming conditions.
From what I've heard carbon capture by technology (as opposed to trees, algae etc.) is not feasible, or at least not in any meaningful time frame. It looks to me to be a way to make a business out of it. I could be wrong.
The climate deniers and associated noise have been a problem. But the burying heads in the sand and resulting inertia of the majority and of our mainstream politicians and pundits has been the bigger problem over the last couple of decades.
Many will now say this is the wrong time to be talking about economic and social restructuring with other crises happening at home and around the world. But these are symptoms of a system that is weak and has been letting down people as much as the planet.
Governments need to find a reset anyway. Although I suspect that the UK will be among those lagging behind and expecting “business as usual” to magically provide the answer.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
