Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-24-2022, 07:16 PM
 
7,749 posts, read 3,785,899 times
Reputation: 14651

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by waltcolorado View Post
This poster asked for a reference but then feels no need to provide any??

You really need to back this up with a reference. (genuine curiosity could be right.. but I would like to know where this came from ... thanks)
1) I asked Ruth for the source from which she copy/pasted. The language, sentence structure & vocabulary used are not consistent with her own personally authored posts. It came from somewhere, not Ruth, and I'd like to know where so I could read that source.

2) I thought the Greenland Ice Sheet comment was common knowledge. At any rate, here's the reference:

https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Cli...798/ref=sr_1_1

Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters by Dr. Steven Koonin.

You remember Dr. Koonin, right? He was President Obama's Chief Climate Scientist.

Quote:
Dr. Steven E. Koonin is a leader in science policy in the United States. He served as Undersecretary for Science in the US Department of Energy under President Obama, where he was the lead author of the Department’s Strategic Plan and the inaugural Quadrennial Technology Review (2011). With more than 200 peer-reviewed papers in the fields of physics and astrophysics, scientific computation, energy technology and policy, and climate science, Dr. Koonin was a professor of theoretical physics at Caltech, also serving as Caltech’s Vice President and Provost for almost a decade. He is currently a University Professor at New York University, with appointments in the Stern School of Business, the Tandon School of Engineering, and the Department of Physics. Dr. Koonin’s memberships include US National Academy of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the JASON group of scientists who solve technical problems for the US government. Since 2014, he has been a trustee of the Institute for Defense Analyses and chaired the National Academies’ Divisional Committee for Engineering and Physical Sciences from 2014-2019. He is currently an independent governor of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and has served in similar roles for the Los Alamos, Sandia, Brookhaven, and Argonne National Laboratories.
I believe his research more than, say, a particularly angry Swedish teenager.



Here are some other tidbits he documents in his extensively researched and footnoted book:
  • Heat waves in the US are now no more common than they were in 1900.
  • The warmest temperatures in the US have not risen in the past fifty years.
  • Humans have had no detectable impact on hurricanes over the past century.
  • The net economic impact of human-induced climate change will be minimal through at least the end of this century.
  • Tornado frequency and severity are not trending up.
  • The number and severity of droughts are not trending up.
  • The extent of global fires has been trending significantly downward.
  • The rate of sea-level rise has not accelerated.
  • Global crop yields are rising, not falling.
  • And while global atmospheric CO2 levels are clearly higher now than two centuries ago, they’re not at any record planetary high—they’re at a low that has only been seen once before in the past 500 million years.

Last edited by moguldreamer; 04-24-2022 at 07:29 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-24-2022, 07:53 PM
 
572 posts, read 279,359 times
Reputation: 618
I'll go with the angry Swedish teenager.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_E._Koonin
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2022, 07:07 AM
 
1,104 posts, read 1,249,236 times
Reputation: 1710
Quote:
2) I thought the Greenland Ice Sheet comment was common knowledge. At any rate, here's the reference: https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Cli...798/ref=sr_1_1 Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters by Dr. Steven Koonin.

Read more: What Climate Change?

First, no reference on your claim of the IPCC economic impact from 3.66 C rise?

If I read this right.. you just referenced a whole book that no one can see unless they buy it?? Nice!

FYI, Scientific American did a review on the referenced book https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...e-badly-wrong/

Oddly enough, about all of the bullets in your post were addressed. I will just post some snips

Quote:
“Greenland’s ice sheet isn’t shrinking any more rapidly today than it was eighty years ago.” For a risk-based approach to climate discussions about what we “should do,” this statement is irrelevant. It is the future that worries us. Observations from 11 satellite missions monitoring the Arctic and Antarctic show that ice sheets are losing mass six times faster than they were in the 1990s.
Quote:
“The warmest temperatures in the US have not risen in the past fifty years.” According to what measure? Highest annual global averages? Absolutely not. That the planet is has warmed since the industrial revolution is unequivocal with more than 30 percent of that warming having occurred over the last 25 years, and the hottest annual temperatures in that history have followed suit [Section SPM.1].
We need to have whole discussion on wildfire.. You will notice that anyone trying to discount wild fire threat never mentions that wildfire was used to clear land in the past.. or when we started to even fight fires or the enormous and escalating increases in effort we do now to contain wild fires that were not done in the past.

CO2.. Uh.. sure there might have been more CO2 when the continents were all different and volcanoes were way more active.. or. Much more relevant is what has happened in the shorter time frame where land masses, mountains etc are more similar to today. Ice core records go out something like 800K years and show that until the last couple hundred years, CO2 levels were never higher than around 200 PPM. Then just in the last several centuries, CO2 concentration is now around 417 PPM.

Last edited by waltcolorado; 04-25-2022 at 07:19 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2022, 07:38 AM
 
9,850 posts, read 7,716,018 times
Reputation: 24485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoisite View Post
Yes, due to my location, absolutely yes, in all the areas mentioned and more. The climate changes have happened relatively rapidly in geological terms where I live and they are still happening. Accordingly over the past 50 years I have had to adjust and am still adjusting to climate changes as they continue to happen more rapidly with each progressive year where I live.

Guido, I think it's hard for you to relate to any of it and are resistant because you just do not yet have any noticeable climate changes happening where you live in a sheltered location. Because of your centrally sheltered geographical location, you are living in a geographically oblivious sheltered limbo land for the time being where time is standing still for you.

If you aren't experiencing any extreme climate changes where you live, that doesn't mean that the extreme changes are not happening elsewhere. Perhaps it's time for you to make yourself aware of the changes that are happening in other parts of the world around you that are not sheltered limbo lands like your own geographical location.

If you don't take yourself out of the state of mental oblivion and become aware of and prepared to adjust to what is actually currently happening outside your own sphere of existence then it could destroy you and everything you love. It will come all the harder and more physically shocking for you when a climate dome of one kind or another eventually swoops in and parks itself directly over top of your sheltered lala land location and stays there on top of you instead of moving on.

Where I live it happened here 3 times last year, it happened so suddenly that there were over 660 people (mostly older people like yourself) who died from just one event alone because they weren't prepared for it, didn't know what to do and didn't have warning or time to adjust. All they could do was just sit there and suffer and die. The flora, fauna, marine life and agricultural crops that were wiped out was unimaginable.

I really think you need to stop ignoring such events that are happening in other places and then denying that they are happening. You do yourself and everyone else a great disservice by being in such denial.

.
Not sure what changes are happening in your area but the bolded is exactly what we all should do. Adjust to the changes.

We truly are powerless to stop or control our changing climate. Adjust. Move. Plant. Do whatever you need to do to survive.

It's what humans have done since the beginning of time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2022, 12:22 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,193 posts, read 107,809,412 times
Reputation: 116087
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguldreamer View Post
From what source did you copy/paste the above?

At any rate, Greenland's ice sheet is not melting any faster today than it was 80+ years ago.
Hi, I didn't see your request until now. I haven't been back to the thread since my first post.

I do not copy and paste. When I quote a source, I put a quote box around the passage, so you know it's someone else's material. I'm sorry you feel, that my recall and description of details from a 10-year-old film were not up to my usual literary standards.

The film is called "Chasing Ice". A photographer sets up cameras all over the Greenland Ice Sheet, to take time-lapse shots over several years, of glaciers calving and others shrinking back, far back. (You can see the trailer for it on youtube.) He also works with scientists to get up-close-and-personal looks at the causes of the accelerated melting. That aspect of the film isn't in the trailer, unfortunately, except for showing members of the team rappelling way down into large holes in the ice. But you can only get so much into a 2-minute trailer. Film is available for streaming or purchase on Amazon.

There's a new Greenland Ice Sheet film, called "Meltdown", produced last year. I haven't seen it; I just discovered it when looking for the title to the film that I mentioned here earlier. It was produced by a photographer and a science writer. It looks like an art film with science mixed in.

Mogul, you seem surprised, that there would be proof, that ice sheets are melting due to human-caused processes. This info is out there, and has been available for some time. It is not faked. It stand to reason, doesn't it, that soot from industrial smokestacks would travel high in the atmosphere, and spread around the world? Some of it settles on ice sheets, where it's easily visible, due to the stark contrast between the white ice and the black soot. Since black absorbs heat, and white deflects it, you can understand how the soot-covered patches of ice would melt faster than surrounding non-soot-covered ice/snow. As those blackened patches continue melting, over time the process penetrates all the way through to the rock deep under the ice sheet. Meltwater pours through the Swiss-cheese holes, creating a liquid conveyor belt that accelerates the ice sheets' movement toward the ocean.

I'm not a scientist. That synopsis is the best I can do. But it makes sense, right?

No one is trying to pull the wool over your eyes with this type of info. The people that have had a vested interest in producing conflicting information are corporate industry. I'm sorry it's been so confusing to the general public.

Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 04-25-2022 at 12:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2022, 12:38 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,193 posts, read 107,809,412 times
Reputation: 116087
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoisite View Post

Where I live it happened here 3 times last year, it happened so suddenly that there were over 660 people (mostly older people like yourself) who died from just one event alone because they weren't prepared for it, didn't know what to do and didn't have warning or time to adjust. All they could do was just sit there and suffer and die. The flora, fauna, marine life and agricultural crops that were wiped out was unimaginable.

.
This is something I wanted to point out earlier, when someone said we can all adjust, as humans have been doing for eons. But when change comes too fast, there isn't time to adjust. Species have been moving north, but in their new location, there's not the food sources they depended on in their old location. So some species are threatened as a result.

But the main thing I wanted to say is, people who are young enough can adapt. Maybe. IDK how one adapts to extreme heat waves that become a regular pattern over time. For now we have A/C, or if we don't have it (Seattle, coastal CA, British Columbia), we can get it. The hydroelectric energy to power the A/C won't always be there, though, as the failure of the Oroville Dam in northern CA during the drought indicates. That was a warning alarm, in case anyone missed it.

In the meantime, the elderly and infirm won't be able to adapt to sudden extreme heat waves. They die. In Europe, most of which doesn't have A/C, elders died in alarming numbers during a major summer heat wave in 2003. 3000 people died in France alone, just one country among many to experience a mass premature die-off of elders that summer. Too bad for them, I guess? Adapt or die? Welcome to the brave new world of indifference to sudden die-offs.

An extreme heat wave in Europe in 2017 destroyed much of Europe's crop supply and thousands of cattle. Adapt to no food? That would be quite a trick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2022, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Shawnee-on-Delaware, PA
8,055 posts, read 7,422,895 times
Reputation: 16314
Why aren't we building more nuclear power plants? We will need reliable electricity when we all start driving electric cars.

Why aren't we using more natural gas? There are untapped trillions of cubic feet in New York alone. Why burn oil?

Why isn't there a carbon tariff on products from countries that don't meet carbon emission criteria? If a country shows that they are trying to reduce emissions by using nuclear power or natural gas, that should be enough to escape the tariff.

Why are we looking the other way as China and India increase their carbon output for another decade before they are expected to adhere to the Paris Accords? 14 miners were declared dead in a China mine collapse 6 weeks ago. You heard about one little boy who died in Morocco but you didn't hear about 14 men in China because it happens so frequently.

Why do climate activists fly on private jets to such a degree that it make headlines when one angry Swedish teenager takes one sailboat ride? Can't they fly first class on a commercial jet even to make a point?

Common people are being told -- not asked -- to give up their way of live but low hanging fruit is left to rot as the grandees and dandies fly private and eat cake. Let's see some sacrifice from the 1% before demanding working class people give up their pickup trucks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2022, 03:49 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
102,193 posts, read 107,809,412 times
Reputation: 116087
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtab4994 View Post
Why aren't we building more nuclear power plants? We will need reliable electricity when we all start driving electric cars.

Why aren't we using more natural gas? There are untapped trillions of cubic feet in New York alone. Why burn oil?

Why isn't there a carbon tariff on products from countries that don't meet carbon emission criteria? If a country shows that they are trying to reduce emissions by using nuclear power or natural gas, that should be enough to escape the tariff.
.
Nuclear is problematic. No place safe to store the radioactive waste products, for one thing, and many of the reactor locations are prone to earthquakes. Just to name a couple of issues. A number of companies are in overdrive right now, working on developing nuclear fusion, which is much safer than the nuclear fission currently used in power production. Fusion has been a dream of scientists for around 40 years. A breakthrough can't come soon enough.

Tapping natural gas is also problematic. The production side of it is poorly controlled, from what I understand, so that gas escapes into the atmosphere, where it contributes to the warming of the atmosphere. Perhaps with tighter controls required, that problem could be adequately addressed. But there have been too many incidents in which leaks were allowed to go on for days.

Here's something that explains the risks of natural gas production and use, better than I can.

Quote:
The drilling and extraction of natural gas from wells and its transportation in pipelines results in the leakage of methane, primary component of natural gas that is 34 times stronger than CO2 at trapping heat over a 100-year period and 86 times stronger over 20 years
More info at:

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/env...ts-natural-gas
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2022, 04:39 PM
 
572 posts, read 279,359 times
Reputation: 618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Nuclear is problematic. No place safe to store the radioactive waste products, for one thing, and many of the reactor locations are prone to earthquakes. Just to name a couple of issues. A number of companies are in overdrive right now, working on developing nuclear fusion, which is much safer than the nuclear fission currently used in power production. Fusion has been a dream of scientists for around 40 years. A breakthrough can't come soon enough.

Tapping natural gas is also problematic. The production side of it is poorly controlled, from what I understand, so that gas escapes into the atmosphere, where it contributes to the warming of the atmosphere. Perhaps with tighter controls required, that problem could be adequately addressed. But there have been too many incidents in which leaks were allowed to go on for days.

Here's something that explains the risks of natural gas production and use, better than I can.

More info at:

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/env...ts-natural-gas
The vast majority of US nuclear reactors are east of the Mississippi.

https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operati...-reactors.html

Recent advances in geothermal tech may end up co-opting the fracking industry infrastructure and employees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2022, 05:01 PM
 
9,850 posts, read 7,716,018 times
Reputation: 24485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
This is something I wanted to point out earlier, when someone said we can all adjust, as humans have been doing for eons. But when change comes too fast, there isn't time to adjust. Species have been moving north, but in their new location, there's not the food sources they depended on in their old location. So some species are threatened as a result.

But the main thing I wanted to say is, people who are young enough can adapt. Maybe. IDK how one adapts to extreme heat waves that become a regular pattern over time. For now we have A/C, or if we don't have it (Seattle, coastal CA, British Columbia), we can get it. The hydroelectric energy to power the A/C won't always be there, though, as the failure of the Oroville Dam in northern CA during the drought indicates. That was a warning alarm, in case anyone missed it.

In the meantime, the elderly and infirm won't be able to adapt to sudden extreme heat waves. They die. In Europe, most of which doesn't have A/C, elders died in alarming numbers during a major summer heat wave in 2003. 3000 people died in France alone, just one country among many to experience a mass premature die-off of elders that summer. Too bad for them, I guess? Adapt or die? Welcome to the brave new world of indifference to sudden die-offs.

An extreme heat wave in Europe in 2017 destroyed much of Europe's crop supply and thousands of cattle. Adapt to no food? That would be quite a trick.
Adapt or die? What's the alternative? You can't control the climate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top