DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Global Collapse
HTML https://globalcollapse.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 543--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: Eddie Date: July 3, 2021, 1:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think Oz is going to feel the effects of climate change at
substantially more destructive and dangerous levels than most
other places in the short term future. This is just based on my
observations and reports from folks like yourself.
But humans are nothing if not adaptable. We haven’t even gotten
that smart about it yet. We’re hung up on stopping the
unstoppable when we should be giving more thought to figuring
out how to survive it.
I am not a climate change denier by any means. I just think the
models are not going to be perfect, and that the kind of climate
chaos that is occurring will have some consequences that are
probably different than current expectations. This is based on
my observations of what is going on here where I live.
I think it’s interesting to see the American Northwest and
Western Canada getting gobsmacked while here at the northern
edge of the Sonoran desert we’re getting rain. That is not
something I would have expected five years ago.
#Post#: 544--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: Nearings fault Date: July 3, 2021, 1:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There is so much low hanging fruit in the adaptation realm that
we have not even started tapping yet before we even start to
talk about collapse. Fire breaks, peak rainy season water
storage, desalination, grey water recycling, sewage nutrient
recycling, building codes designed to counter extremes of hot
and cold, hardened infrastructure. So much there. All expensive
and all energy intensive but I don't think it's more expensive
then uprooting and abandoning the existing infrastructure
though. That is where I've decided my next career lies. Trying
to tie together all the pieces of the energy and resiliency
pie...
#Post#: 546--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: K-Dog Date: July 3, 2021, 4:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]Your continuous strident doomer’s bias is getting kinda
old. You could benefit from a little humility. I’m not your
enemy. I also am far from stupid, in case you haven’t seen from
my past ten years of writing.[/quote]
A continuous and strident doomer bias is appropriate to an ADMIN
of a forum named GLOBAL COLLAPSE. To have Thor's hammer here
you have to have the bias.
[img]
HTML https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.billboard.com%2Ffiles%2Fmedia%2Fmadonna-like-a-virgin-cover-billboard-650-compressed.jpg&f=1&nofb=1[/img]
Or is Madonna still a virgin?
#Post#: 547--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: Phil Potts Date: July 3, 2021, 4:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Eddie link=topic=14.msg543#msg543 date=1625336284]
I think Oz is going to feel the effects of climate change at
substantially more destructive and dangerous levels than most
other places in the short term future.
[/quote]
The last 2 summers didn't have any heatwaves that I know of, and
I did ask people on the mainland. Still, going with summer of
2018-19, Xmas day in Adl was predicted to be around 30C. I said
that would be wrong, Adl is my home town and every year I've
been there over Xmas, it is 36-38C on Xmas day. Turned out to be
in that range.
It was also the first summer I spent there since 1998-99 and the
first time I experienced a couple of 45+ days. Luckily they were
dry. Both times something under the bonnet failed. Brushes in
alternator burnt out in a 3.8 GM V6 the first, at 45c and aircon
compressor on a Toyota Hilux the second time at 48C. I'd never
seen anything higher than 41 there last century.
I've had 41 or even 42 in Perth WA a couple of times, as long as
I drank lots of water was not even uncomfortable. It's dry and
breezy there.
Tropical north has become hotter in monsoon season with less
rainfall. With near 100% humidity that can kill you at 39, being
over your body temp. So there's been adapting of people who work
outdoors starting at 5am and finishing at 2pm.
Here I'm my highland locale, we just had 5 weeks of heavy fog
and dark sky, with a lot of rain. Coastal areas have winds to
move some of that cloud away. What is the effect on growing
winter vegetables? So many things like that need to be figured
out and adapted to. Erratic weather and temperature extremes.
#Post#: 557--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: John of Wallan Date: July 5, 2021, 4:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the climate dont get ya the shortqges will....
Interesting article.
Pretty well sums up what I think; short term economic and social
problems for next 5 years followed by eccosytem collapse and
death in the 5 years after that.
Simple really.Short term pain followed by long term death. ;D
JOW
Link:
HTML https://thesenecaeffect.blogspot.com/
Text:
Sunday, July 4, 2021
Climate Change and Resource Depletion. Which Way to Ruin is
Faster?
What could bring down the industrial civilization? Would it be
global warming (fire) or resource depletion (ice)? At present,
it may well be that depletion is hitting us faster. But, in the
long run, global warming may hit us much harder. Maybe the fall
of our civilization will be Fire AND ice.
The years after World War 2 saw perhaps the fastest expansion
and the greatest prosperity in history for humankind. Yet, it
was becoming clear that it was exactly this burst of prosperity
and expansion that was creating the conditions for its own
collapse. How long could humankind continue growing an economy
based on limited natural resources? How long could the human
population keep increasing?
The discussion soon split into two main lines: one focused on
depletion, the other on pollution. Over the years, the
"depletionists" concentrated on fossil fuels, the main source of
energy that keeps civilization moving. Initially, the
disappearance of fossil fuels was seen simply as a necessary
step in the progression toward nuclear energy. But the waning of
the nuclear idea generated the idea that the lack of fossil
energy would eventually bring down civilization. The collapse
was often seen as the result of "peak oil," the point in time
when oil production couldn't be increased anymore. It was
estimated to occur at some moment during the first 2-3 decades
of the 21st century.
On the other side, the focus was initially on pollutants such as
smog, heavy metals, carcinogenic substances, and others.
Pollution was generally seen as a solvable problem and, indeed,
good progress was done in abating it in many fields. But the
emerging idea of global warming soon started to be seen by
"climatists" as an existential threat to humankind, or even to
the whole planetary ecosystem. The time scale of climate change
was never exactly defined in terms of momentous events, but as a
gradual temperature rise that could play out over a century or
more. Some climatists spoke of "tipping points," e.g. the
"methane explosion," that could have brought rapid ruin to
humankind. But it was impossible to estimate the time scale of
these events and the majority of climatists tended to regard
those who expressed these views as scare-mongering
catastrophists.
Climatists and depletionists were looking at the same scene,
just from two different viewpoints. But human beings notoriously
have difficulties in changing their views. Their minds seem to
become easily fixed on a single problem, and they tend to play
the game of "my problem is bigger than yours" So, climatists and
depletionists found it hard to work together and, often, they
became bitter enemies of each other. It was a dispute that
reminded the struggles of the Medieval Christian Church between
heretics and orthodoxes (with the orthodoxes defined only after
the debate had ended, sometimes with the members of other side
burned at the stake).
Depletionists were often geologists who had no training in
climate physics. Sometimes they would scoff at the idea of
climate change as the delusion of a group of pseudo-scientists
who played with models unrelated to the real world. More often,
they would not attack climate science directly, but argue that
the depletion of fossil fuels would solve all climate problems:
no oil, no emissions. Then, no emissions, no climate change.
On their side, climatists were often specialists in atmospheric
physics. They were heavily focused on climate models while
tending to rely on industrial estimates for the available fossil
resources as external parameters in their calculations. They
tended to see these resources as abundant and believe that
curbing emissions to avoid a climate disaster would make
depletion irrelevant.
It was a clash that could not be solved by discussions among
people who were speaking different scientific, and even
political, languages. Peak oil had its moment of popularity
during the first decade of the 21st century, then it faded out.
Climate change, instead, kept making inroads in the global
memesphere, despite the dogged resistance of several lobbies and
political sectors. By the end of the 2nd decade of the century,
it seemed to have become something that could be actually acted
upon.
The reasons for the tilt of the debate to favor climatists may
have been more than one, but overall it may well be that it was
because it is much easier to worry about a problem that is more
distant in time. Politicians could comfortably claim that they
were doing something useful while proposing that the airlines
could run their planes on biofuels or that cars could be run on
"blue hydrogen." Peak oil may have arrived, probably as early
as 2008 for conventional oil, but it was simply invisible to the
eyes of the public and of the decision-makers.
Ours is an age of "either-or" positions (you are either with us
or against us, as G.W. Bush famously said). All along the
debate, it was impossible to propose a compromise that took into
account both problems, depletion and warming. Nevertheless,
already in 1972, the study titled "The Limits to Growth" had
tackled the problem in a holistic way (image by Magne Myrtveit).
The computer model used in the calculation didn't share the
limitations of the human mind and could simply compute the
results of the interactions of the various factors. At that
time, the importance of climate change was not yet clear, but
the "pollution" parameter was later recognized as representing
the effects of greenhouse emissions.
The results of the "base case" scenario computed in "The Limits
to Growth" study (see the figure, below) indicated a probable
collapse of the industrial civilization for some moment of the
second decade of the 21st century. It was intended to be the
illustration of a trend rather than a prediction, but it may
have turned out to have been remarkably prophetic.
But what was the cause of the collapse? Depletion or pollution?
The answer was "both," but the model showed that the peaking of
the production of natural resources coincided with the start of
the decline of the industrial system. Pollution (climate change)
arrived later and its effect was mainly to make the decline
steeper, generating a typical "Seneca Cliff."
This result made a lot of sense: pollution is a consequence of
resource exploitation and you would expect it to arrive after
that depletion has played out its cycle of growth. Yet, it was
also possible to create scenarios using the "Limits" model where
pollution had such negative effects to become the main driver of
the collapse. As usual, the future can be imagined but not
predicted. In 1972 it was way too early to presume to be able to
predict what was supposed to happen 50 years later.
But things kept moving and, in 2009, Dave Holmgren systematized
and arranged the collapse question in a semi-quantitative
quadrant that indicated several possible futures that depended
on the interplay of depletion and warming. Holmgren didn't take
a specific position on what was the most immediate threat, but
his diagram provided guidelines to assess just that.
And here we are: in 2020 Holmgren's scenarios were reviewed by
"Rutilius Namatianus" (RN) in a series of three posts on "The
Seneca Effect" (one, two, three). He arrived at the conclusion
that -- just like in the "base case" scenario of The Limits to
Growth -- depletion is arriving faster and hitting us harder.
According to RN, the reaction to the 2020 pandemic is mostly an
effect of the economic system being on the verge of collapse
because of depletion, even though the public has not realized
that yet.
Like other depletionists, RN is skeptical about the existence of
human-caused climate change. Apart from that, though, his
position makes sense. Right now, it is difficult to find a
sector of the economy so badly damaged by global warming that it
might cause the system to collapse. So, the crash of 2020 may be
attributed to the constraints generated by the gradually
increasing costs of the exploitation of natural resources for a
growing economy and an increasing population.
A civilization based on conspicuous consumption cannot keep
going for long when there is little left that can be consumed.
Hence, we are seeing a series of correlated changes: less
traveling (especially by plane), the collapse of the tourism
industry, the contraction of the entertainment industry, less
commuting, and the reduction or the disappearance of other
wasteful activities that we can't afford anymore. All that is
officially just temporary and things are supposed to return soon
to "normal," that is to the best of worlds. But we may
reasonably doubt that. Instead, we may well be seeing the start
of the Seneca Cliff that "The Limits to Growth" had already seen
in its scenarios of 1972.
Does all that mean that climate change is not a problem anymore?
Not at all. Surely, the economic crash of 2020 is reducing the
human impact on climate, but as I noted more than once complex
systems always kick back (a quote by John Gall). We still have
to receive a kick from Earth's climate that may be much worse
than anything we received so far (*). What we are doing to the
ecosystem might turn out to be just a moderate perturbation,
with the system kicking back to its original state in a few
millennia -- or maybe even just in a few centuries. In this
case, some forms of human civilization could survive the change.
Or the ecosystem may kick us up all the way to the Eocene, with
a temperature of 12 C higher than it is now. That won't
necessarily mean the extinction of the human species, but it
would not be unlikely.
And here we are, laughing at the pitiful attempts of the
so-called "decision-makers" to stop the tsunami with teaspoons.
We are both spectators and actors of the grandest spectacle in
the history of the world: the end of the mightiest civilization
that ever existed. No matter how our future will be playing out,
remember that the destiny of soap bubbles is just of shining
gloriously in the sun for a short while. Universes may be little
more than a shower of soap bubbles in the sun, just on a grander
scale. As we fade out, there will be new universes and we may
even be able to create a few ourselves. Humans may have done a
lot of damage to the ecosystem, but surely they never lacked
fantasy!
(*) In 2012 I wrote a post on "Cassandra's Legacy" titled
"Confessions of a Peak Oiler" that some people interpreted as if
I had reneged the peak oil movement. But it was not that
(otherwise I would have titled it "Confessions of a FORMER peak
oiler.") I just made the point that the climate threat was
bigger than the depletion threat, not that it didn't exist.
#Post#: 570--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: John of Wallan Date: July 7, 2021, 3:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ice free arctic= shit storm and a half within a season or so.
Stock up on the popcorn, the show will be epic.
JOW
Link:
HTML https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/
Text:
Tuesday, July 6, 2021
Arctic sea ice disappearing fast
Above image, from the National Institute of Polar Research in
Japan, shows Arctic sea ice extent at a record low for the time
of year, on July 4, 2021, at 8.4 million km².
Subsequently, the NSIDC also indicated that Arctic sea ice was
at record low extent for the time of year, on July 5, 2021, at
8.867 million km² (image above).
Arctic sea ice is getting very thin rapidly, threatening the
latent heat tipping point to get crossed soon.
The U.S. Navy animation on the right shows Arctic sea ice
thickness (in m) for the 30 days up to July 4, 2021, with eight
days of forecasts included.
As sea ice gets thinner, ever less ocean heat gets consumed in
the process of melting the subsurface ice, to the point where -
as long as air temperatures are still low enough - there still
is a thin layer of ice at the surface that will still consume
some heat below the surface, but that at the same time acts as a
seal, preventing heat from the Arctic Ocean to enter the
atmosphere.
Albedo loss, latent heat loss and changes to the jet stream can
dramatically amplify the temperature rise of the water in the
Arctic Ocean, with the danger of causing destabilization of
hydrates at its seafloor, resulting in eruption of huge amounts
of methane from hydrates and from free gas underneath the
hydrates.
And while the situation in 2021 is dire, the outlook for the
years beyond 2021 is that things look set to get progressively
worse.
Outlook is getting worse
This situation in 2021 is the more remarkable given that we're
in a La Niña period, as illustrated by the NOAA image on the
right showing a forecast issued July 5, 2021, that indicates
that La Niña is expected to reach a new low by the end of 2021.
El Niño events, according to NASA, occur roughly every two to
seven years. As temperatures keep rising, ever more frequent
strong El Niño events are likely to occur. NOAA anticipates the
current La Niña to continue for a while, so it's likely that a
strong El Niño will occur somewhere from 2023 to 2025.
Sunspots are on the rise. We were at a low point in the sunspot
cycle late 2019/early 2020. As the image on the right shows, the
number of sunspots is rising and can be expected to rise further
as we head toward 2026, and temperatures can be expected to rise
accordingly.
According to James Hansen et al., the variation of solar
irradiance from solar minimum to solar maximum is of the order
of 0.25 W/m⁻².
Temperatures are currently also suppressed by sulfate cooling,
and their impact is falling away as we progress with the
necessary transition away from fossil fuel and biofuel, toward
the use of more wind turbines and solar panels instead. Aerosols
typically fall out of the atmosphere within a few weeks, so as
the transition progresses, this will cause temperatures to rise
over the next few years.
So, the outlook is grim. Even so, the right thing to do is to
help avoid the worst things from happening, through
comprehensive and effective action as described in the Climate
Plan.
Links
• National Institute of Polar Research (NIPR) in Japan
HTML https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop
• The National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) at the
University of Colorado Boulder
HTML https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph
• NOAA ENSO Evolution
HTML https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/analysis_monitoring/lanina/enso_evolution-status-fcsts-web.pdf
• Naval Research Laboratory of the U.S. Navy
HTML https://www7320.nrlssc.navy.mil/GLBhycomcice1-12/arctic.html
• Climate Plan
HTML https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/p/climateplan.html
#Post#: 573--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: John of Wallan Date: July 7, 2021, 6:31 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Run by Sam Carana or something like that.
Lots of reputable Data says we are headed for an ice free arctic
soon.
Any time in next 5 years is soon by my measure. I dont see
complete collapse in a year or 2. That will take a decade +/- a
decade.
No ice up north will play havoc (More havoc) with weather
patterns by all the stuff I have read.
If you know better please share.
I get it, you dont believe the doom and gloomers saying the
world will end tomorrow, so any warnings of collapse must also
be wrong, unless its in 100 years when you are dead and you can
go along with business as usual.
You dont like Guy M. I get that too. Play the ball not the man.
Pick holes in the data instead of taking the easy option of
character assassination. Should be plenty of dirt on me if you
look hard enough...
10 years, 20 years or 50 years is still short term when we are
talking about the potential disruption from climate change.
JOW
#Post#: 575--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: John of Wallan Date: July 8, 2021, 4:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Buddy, have a cold beer and relax before you blow a valve.
1. I dont know why Guy left Belize. I really dont care. Perhaps
you should ask him if you want to know about his personal life.
I wont make assumptions. He could a saint or the devil himself.
Play the ball not the man.
2. I cant recall any of the stuff I have read or listened to
saying world will end from peak oil in 2014. Please provide the
links. Sounds unlike anything I have read about peak oil. Play
the ball not the man.
3. I was 10 in the 1980 as was Guy plus or minus a few years as
far as I can tell. Cant recall him being active in the doom and
gloom business back then. Is this character assassination of all
people who see bad things in the future because of bad
predictions in the past? Play the ball not the man.
4. I cant predict the future with certainty. I dont know if any
of the other disasters you mentioned are going to happen any
time soon, but I can see climate problems coming based on data,
models and observations. Perhaps you need to look at them. Let
me know which ones you find issue with the data, and play the
ball not the man.
5. If the stuff I post upsets you, please dont read it. I am not
trying to upset you or anyone else. I am just sharing
information I find interesting and relevant to what I see around
me. I really do try to only post credible sources and I will try
my best to not make shit up or post stuff which is not data
driven. I will also do my utmost to not mention the professor
you seem to have issues with... Cant recall mentioning him
recently. If you take issue with the data I post please point
out the errors. I really do hope my boys future is better than
its looking. Play the ball not the man.
JOW
#Post#: 577--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: K-Dog Date: July 9, 2021, 6:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If infrastructure collapses and capitalism continues to
determine our lives. An economic downturn can ruin the ability
to get at remaining oil. Remaining oil extraction depends on a
healthy and very technically advanced industry. A global
depression could bring on a Seneca cliff of no oil at all.
[img]
HTML https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.terra-drone.net%2Fglobal%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F08%2FShell-Leman-offshore-3D-drone-UAV-mapping-survey-platform-3D-10.jpg&f=1&nofb=1[/img]
The tumor becomes harder to feed.
#Post#: 582--------------------------------------------------
Re: Climate Doom
By: K-Dog Date: July 10, 2021, 11:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]The beauty of a global depression is that the technical
folks, when asked to restart some technical project or another,
and being laid off or starving, would happily and
enthusiastically get back into the traces to plan and execute
new projects I imagine.[/quote]
I agree but if there is no money to pay them they won't work on
a project for free.
So what happens? I am thinking of a mix of politicians and
other assorted assholes as being ingredients of a cake put in
the oven to bake. What comes out? What flavor? You take a
fork and try a piece. It takes like fascism.
When the EROEI is so low capitalism can't fund oil extraction
there may be other ways?
[img]
HTML https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fauschwitz.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F07%2Ffactory-at-Auschwitz.jpg&f=1&nofb=1[/img]
Where there is a will there is a way. This is true. But is
there a situation where technical challenges are so great and
the costs so high that money says it has better things to do
than fund an oil extraction project that require billions be
spent before a dime is made?
As it is now what happens when all the people who invested in
fracking figure out they won't get paid? How long can private
profit be propped up with public money before pitchforks come
out?
I think the days of the snazzy uniforms will soon return if you
know what I mean. Necessity being the mother of invention and
all that.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page