|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jun 2, 2017 12:51:52 GMT
In this topic, I want you to discuss about the current climate change, its effects, and how to mitigate possible damage.
|
|
|
|
Post by gedzilla on Jun 2, 2017 12:58:54 GMT
This is going to lead to politics inevitably, this is prob a bad idea
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Jun 2, 2017 13:24:49 GMT
This is going to lead to politics inevitably, this is prob a bad idea Believe it or not, but outside of the US, global warming is not a political thing. Here in Belgium virtually all political parties have things about climate change and the environment in their program. To be fair though, not all parties pursue it equally vigorously. Thing is, western Europe is making quite the effort to minimize global warming, despite not being threatened by it by (not directly, at least). The US is threatened with more intense hurricanes and droughts in greater numbers, but for Europe, the threat posed by climate change is mostly indirect, like mass immigration and exotic diseases (like malaria) migrating north. |
|
|
|
Post by tukuro on Jun 2, 2017 13:33:26 GMT
Even the Paris agreement wouldn't have been enough. The only faith I have right now in countering climate change is through geoengineering. (Aerosol injection, active carbon scrubbing, etc.)
|
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Jun 2, 2017 14:00:38 GMT
Even the Paris agreement wouldn't have been enough. The only faith I have right now in countering climate change is through geoengineering. (Aerosol injection, active carbon scrubbing, etc.) It took a while to get the political will for global cooperation on reducing emissions of greenhouse gasses. International collaboration on geoengineering will take a while. I'm not excluding anything, but reducing emissions seems like a good first step. If that proves insufficient, other avenues can be explored, alongside reducing emissions of greenhouse gasses. |
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 2, 2017 14:03:06 GMT
This is going to lead to politics inevitably, this is prob a bad idea Believe it or not, but outside of the US, global warming is not a political thing. Here in Belgium virtually all political parties have things about climate change and the environment in their program. To be fair though, not all parties pursue it equally vigorously. Thing is, western Europe is making quite the effort to minimize global warming, despite not being threatened by it by (not directly, at least). The US is threatened with more intense hurricanes and droughts in greater numbers, but for Europe, the threat posed by climate change is mostly indirect, like mass immigration and exotic diseases (like malaria) migrating north. yeah, you can stand next to that dike with raising sea levels, I'l be watching from my hill soon to be island |
|
|
|
Post by samchiu2000 on Jun 2, 2017 14:15:00 GMT
Actually how severe the climatic change can affect us in near future (like 50 years from today) ? Sorry that I didn't know much about the effect of climatic change...
|
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jun 2, 2017 14:49:34 GMT
Actually how severe the climatic change can affect us in near future (like 50 years from today) ? Sorry that I didn't know much about the effect of climatic change... Scientists don't usually mention 50 years, but by 2100 the sea level will rose by around 0.5-1.5 meters. Say good bye to the marine ecosystem and biodiversity, say hello to more extreme weathers, hotter climate and new deadly diseases (or old ones which got released from the thawing permafrost). |
|
|
|
Post by shiolle on Jun 2, 2017 15:27:50 GMT
Actually how severe the climatic change can affect us in near future (like 50 years from today) ? Sorry that I didn't know much about the effect of climatic change... There is this series of videos by World Meteorological Organisation, or did you want something more in-depth? |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jun 2, 2017 15:48:51 GMT
I think we really need to raise the climate change awareness to the people. A lot of people seem to not care, dismiss or ridicule it. This is a huge problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pttg on Jun 2, 2017 16:20:52 GMT
This is going to lead to politics inevitably, this is prob a bad idea There's pluses and minuses of a very science-heavy group here, actually. There (hopefully) won't be much argument over whether or not it's happening, but there might be some arguments over what type of power system to use. At least renewable crowd (the greens) and the nuclear crowd (the Cherenkov blues) can agree that putting more CO2 into the atmosphere is a bad idea. At this point, some kind of geoengineering in response will be needed. I'd say atmospheric CO2 sequestration. Probably something with amine scrubbers. It'd be a good partner to solar since it doesn't need to run 24/7. |
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Jun 2, 2017 16:57:17 GMT
I really need a guide on how to debate the deniers without turning the debate room into an epic verbal battle arena ._.
|
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jun 2, 2017 17:02:32 GMT
Warning: heavy science incoming.Our ability to predict global temperature trends has so far been pitifully disappointing.  Therefore, we must look towards historical data. Let's start with the oft-quoted 600,000 year record presented in the movie "An Inconvenient Truth."  CO2 levels are lagging behind temperature. This is clearly seen when superimposing the two graphs, with nice detail:  The conclusion to draw is that either temperature is dictating CO 2 levels, or that some third factor controls both of them (more likely). In fact, insolation is a great candidate for the controlling factor:  As you can see, there is also a correlation here, and this one is actually in the correct direction (with temperature lagging behind insolation). By the way, here's an extreme long view (hundred-million year scale):  There are other factors that can decouple temperature levels from CO 2, and the Earth has a temperature maximum it basically refuses to cross regardless of any factors. TL;DR: CoaDE's backstory is badly researched.
|
|
|
|
Post by Enderminion on Jun 2, 2017 18:22:52 GMT
you forgot the fact that one side nuked the sh*t out of the pacific and covered the north pole in coal dust, and the other side dropped a rock
|
|
|
|
Post by apophys on Jun 2, 2017 19:14:39 GMT
Say good bye to the marine ecosystem and biodiversity, say hello to more extreme weathers, hotter climate and new deadly diseases (or old ones which got released from the thawing permafrost). Actually, global biodiversity hasn't particularly cared for either temperature or CO 2 levels. Compare this with my long-term view above:  Our current mass extinction has much more to do with habitat destruction, pollution, and over-harvesting (imho). |
|
