Global warming, what to do?

[Galactis]

Concrete doesn't give off CO2, concrete production does. The factory where they make concrete.

Non issue regarding concrete. Buildings will be made from concrete regardless even with a change to renewables over time. Otherwise buildings would be made from wood.

I think China is already taking steps to reduce their coal usage and consumption. In fact I know they are catching up to us quickly. Fusion research, solar and wind and so on. They will catch us whether we like it or not.

[PC2]

We'd be up to our necks in salt water by then.

Yeah, but only if you plan on standing directly on the beach for the next 1000 years...

[Shadowferal]

Big shitty claims that tech is going to save us, is nothing more than that.
If nothing is showing tech saving us all from ourselves is happening now, don't imagine it'll happen later.

[Ghostpanther]

Do you know how hard it would be to convince everyone to pay? We'd be up to our necks in salt water by then.

And we're filthy rich.

We are trillions in debt. And no, I do not buy into the sky is falling paranoia. Steps should be taken for sure to help reduce pollution. But unless the rest of the world, esp the biggest polluters get on board, the effort is not going to near as successful as it could be.

[Jerety]

In my opinion, the problems can't be fixed.

[Epuration]

So, you don't consider the US as one of the biggest polluters?

obviously not. Trump runs the US on clean coal unlike those other more cancerous energy sources or power like wind turbines( trump proved they give you cancer). Anyone who doesn't think the US leads in clean energy is either a russian shill or retarded.

[Galactis]

Shit, I forgot all about the clean coal that runs the US now. It's probably zero emissions too. Whoa, the US is the first zero emissions country in the world! Thanks, Trump!!

Can we not be troll-y or sarcastic about Trump. Don't waste the breath.

I will say, Clean coal is about as clean as scooping up some dirt and wiping it with a tissue and saying it's clean now.

[Shadowferal]

Study touts planting 1 trillion trees as most effective climate change solution

The cheapest way to halt the effects of climate change could be planting 1 trillion trees, according to a new study.

The study in the journal Science, first reported by The Associated Press, found that planting trees could be the most effective way to remove carbon from the atmosphere, but cautioned that it would have little effect without a reduction of emissions around the globe.

“This is by far — by thousands of times — the cheapest climate change solution” study co-author Thomas Crowther, an ecologist at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, said.

“It’s certainly a monumental challenge, which is exactly the scale of the problem of climate change,” he added.

Though, Crowther cautioned, “None of this works without emissions cuts."

[d00mGuArD]

Big shitty claims that tech is going to save us, is nothing more than that.
If nothing is showing tech saving us all from ourselves is happening now, don't imagine it'll happen later.

Really? Nothing shows to you that tech will be able to do amazing things in 80 years????

What about geoengineering? It is an actual science taught at universities for this exact purpose. Oxford Uni started in 2010. You think they will slack and never do anything?
Yeah that must be it. Better stop eating meat instead, and start eating what produces our oxygen. That will work.

Tech will be able to do amazing things in much less than 80 years really.

Tech is the only way we can hope to keep a livable environment with a high quality of living. Without major tech interventions , it may already too late

here is a good read for you:

Time is no longer on our side,” one geoengineering advocate, former British government chief scientist David King, told a conference last fall. “What we do over the next 10 years will determine the future of humanity for the next 10,000 years.”

King helped secure the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015, but he no longer believes cutting planet-warming emissions is enough to stave off disaster. He is in the process of establishing a Center for Climate Repair at Cambridge University. It would be the world’s first major research center dedicated to a task that, he says, “is going to be necessary

Technologies earmarked for the Cambridge center’s attention include a range of efforts to restrict solar radiation from reaching the lower atmosphere, including spraying aerosols of sulphate particles into the stratosphere, and refreezing rapidly warming parts of the polar regions by deploying tall ships to pump salt particles from the ocean into polar clouds to make them brighter.

source: https://www.wired.com/story/more-sci...-be-essential/

[Michh]

Wow, now this is something I could totally get behind, even if just half of these were planted, according to the article, it would be a big win for everyone. Having grown up in the country in Ms, and now living in the Houston burbs, more trees would be welcome.

https://apnews.com/8ac33686b64a4fbc991997a72683b1c5

[MidnightReveries]

According to David Icke global warming is a lie.

[SirBeef]

He said the world would reach a point of no return in a decade, which would have been two years ago.

By many accounts we reached a point of no return. So he may be right. The time to start doing anything about this was a long time ago.

[wunksta]

According to David Icke global warming is a lie.

David Icke is the Alex Jones of the UK. He also claims there are lizard people living among us.

[Elegiac]

Study touts planting 1 trillion trees as most effective climate change solution

The cheapest way to halt the effects of climate change could be planting 1 trillion trees, according to a new study.

The study in the journal Science, first reported by The Associated Press, found that planting trees could be the most effective way to remove carbon from the atmosphere, but cautioned that it would have little effect without a reduction of emissions around the globe.

“This is by far — by thousands of times — the cheapest climate change solution” study co-author Thomas Crowther, an ecologist at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, said.

“It’s certainly a monumental challenge, which is exactly the scale of the problem of climate change,” he added.

Though, Crowther cautioned, “None of this works without emissions cuts."

Time to fix the global unemployment rate. *cracks knuckles*

[d00mGuArD]

Wow, now this is something I could totally get behind, even if just half of these were planted, according to the article, it would be a big win for everyone. Having grown up in the country in Ms, and now living in the Houston burbs, more trees would be welcome.

https://apnews.com/8ac33686b64a4fbc991997a72683b1c5

I have planted 109 trees and counting. My goal is to eventually reach 1000. It won't be fast, but I participate in every possible reforestation event I can

That is the only thing I do for the environment and I don't have plans to do anything else anytime soon.

1 billion people times 1000 trees each, and we are sorted

Spread the word! just go for a few trees at a time. Even if we fail to plant enough trees, at least the areas around us will be greener!

[Deletedaccount1]

What to do?

Don't do anything. Climate models are wrong frequently because they place too much importance on CO2 (a relatively weak greenhouse gas) compared to hundreds of other factors that can change climates. The term "the climate" is ridiculous in and of itself, as if the Earth has one singular climate and not dozens of different regions that are unique to themselves. If warming occurs over the next 100 years, the worst that will happen is the need to change the crops that are grown in equatorial countries while areas like Siberia will actually become more habitable.

[PC2]

By many accounts we reached a point of no return. So he may be right. The time to start doing anything about this was a long time ago.

What are you claiming can't be returned from? Try to be precise.

[Deletedaccount1]

This is why this forum has essentially become Americans talking to themselves. No one else would really have the patience to talk someone this stupid.

For the record in the unlikely event there is someone with a brain reading this, the criticism of climate models is completely valid...if the year were 1988 when that was all we had to go on.

Since then we've had a multitude of evidence from multiple disciplines such as oceanology, naturalists etc etc as well as climatologists and meteorologists. Climate change has been more comprehensively proven than anything ever. But Jeb here knows better apparently.

And there are plenty of climatologists and oceanlogists who continue to be skeptical of climate models, not to mention other scientists and economists who from the outside looking in would be skeptical of anything that attempts to localize a phenomenon onto a graph. The myth that 97% of climate scientists think climate change is an immediate existential crisis comes from a bad study called Cooke et al 2013 which looked at online climate research abstracts and attempted to deduce whether they supported or denied the consensus on AGW. This number was then repeated at length in the media by people who have no idea where it came from.

Google Freeman Dyson, Richard Lindzen, Bjorn Lomborg (A European), John Christy, Nir Shaviv, David D. Henderson. All respected in climatology or other scientific disciplines (except Henderson who is an economist) and all are skeptical of climate models.

[wunksta]

Richard Lindzen

I just want to highlight this person in particular, as they have claimed there has been no warming since 1997 and no changes in Antarctica ice which is demonstrably false.

[Deletedaccount1]

I just want to highlight this person in particular, as they have claimed there has been no warming since 1997 and no changes in Antarctica ice which is demonstrably false.

Where did he say those things?