Author Topic: Global Warming  (Read 260068 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2100 on: November 28, 2016, 07:39:38 PM »
Quite a surge in global temps since the 1980s.....
https://twitter.com/mcnees/status/803255407116328960
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2101 on: November 29, 2016, 11:06:30 AM »


This is the correct way to view Trump's climate policy. He has the power to decide if 100,000s live or die.
https://theconversation.com/dear-mr-trump-climate-policy-puts-lives-in-your-hands-69111
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline Gramarye

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4832
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2102 on: November 29, 2016, 12:57:48 PM »
I go back and forth on my feelings about Trump's victory, but reading histrionic hyperventilations like this are when I'm at my happiest that he won.  "Save the planet, grow the government!"  "Lead us, wise UN bureaucrats!"  Seriously?  The article itself handwaves away the massive shifts in the renewables market that will keep gradually consigning coal to the ash heap (no pun intended) with minimal or no government intervention in the economy.

Do people even know what's in the Paris Agreement?  The structure of it includes a UN-enforced cap-and-trade system (based on "nationally determined contributions"), i.e., one that member countries can only change basically by overthrowing their governments with ones hostile to the entire agreement (which, of course, America just effectively did).  It was also never ratified by the US Senate, and somehow we're all expected to pretend that Obama had the unilateral authority to ratify it on his own.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/29/obama-will-bypass-senate-ratify-paris-climate-acco/

Offline Foraker

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 464
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2103 on: November 29, 2016, 03:55:15 PM »
The article itself handwaves away the massive shifts in the renewables market that will keep gradually consigning coal to the ash heap (no pun intended) with minimal or no government intervention in the economy.

Do people even know what's in the Paris Agreement?  The structure of it includes a UN-enforced cap-and-trade system (based on "nationally determined contributions"), i.e., one that member countries can only change basically by overthrowing their governments with ones hostile to the entire agreement (which, of course, America just effectively did).  It was also never ratified by the US Senate, and somehow we're all expected to pretend that Obama had the unilateral authority to ratify it on his own.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/29/obama-will-bypass-senate-ratify-paris-climate-acco/

Apparently contrary to the "histrionic hyperventilation" of some news sources, I don't see anything in the Paris Agreement that provides any enforcement mechanism. 
You can read the Paris Agreement yourself, but it's quite dull -- particularly good if you're having trouble falling asleep:  https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf

I may have missed it -- can you tell me what sections define the mandatory cap-and-trade provisions?
 
The Washington Times article you cited quotes Sen. James Inhofe, a vocal critic, saying that the agreement changes nothing.
Quote
Sen. James M. Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee chairman, has repeatedly said that the Paris Agreement will change nothing. He issued a white paper in April that said the pact amounts to “empty promises that will have no meaningful impact on the climate.”

I agree with the article that Congress should have to ratify the treaty, but I suppose that without Senate approval any compliance with the treaty will be voluntary as well.  Perhaps that is Sen. Inhofe's point.  Congress would have to agree to any changes in the law, and there is only so much that the executive can do on its own.  Particularly if Congress disagrees with any actions of the executive.


I disagree that renewable energy sources would have replaced coal without government intervention -- both regulations on emissions and grants and subsidies for both research and development of renewable sources have been critical to increased expenses in the coal industry and improving and lowering the startup costs for the renewable energy industries. 


Offline Gramarye

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4832
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2104 on: November 29, 2016, 04:08:41 PM »
It doesn't provide an enforcement mechanism.  But it inherently attempts to move the Overton window in favor of legitimizing such an enforcement mechanism later, when voluntary compliance is obviously not forthcoming (which it clearly won't be), and that is bad enough.  Because treaties are considered part of American law, incorporated by the Constitution (at least when they're actually ratified, of course, but even on mere signature by the president, they can have some effects), and the debate would quickly turn to the "absurdity" that we've made a "national commitment" with "no way to implement it" or some such technocratic-activist babble.  The sooner we're formally and clearly free of it, the better.

As for the notion that renewables would have supplanted coal without government intervention, we might be a little bit behind where we are right now, but even that is anything but certain.  The cost curve for installed solar power is plummeting so rapidly that it's hard to say where we'd be if we'd started down the same curve just a few years later, especially since a lot of the highest-value research would have been fully funded anyway (it's the marginal research, not the low-hanging fruit, that gets cut when subsidies are less generous).

https://cleantechnica.com/2016/08/17/10-solar-energy-facts-charts-everyone-know/

And as you said, government intervention deliberately pushed up costs for the coal companies, many of which are now in bankruptcy.  I actually believe that they'd be in bankruptcy anyway because of competition from more affordable sources, but the consequence of government meddling is a lot of blame and bitterness and further polarization of heartland against coast that could have been avoided by simply letting the economy run on its own.  Because there are people who know that there are people like you who say "increased expenses in the coal industry" like it's a social good, which is of course a major part of the reason for the backlash against environmentalism and renewable energy.  It's easy to be the priest naming someone else to be the human sacrifice, but it's generally bad for the priest in a democracy to forget that the sacrifice gets a vote, too.

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2105 on: November 30, 2016, 08:13:31 AM »
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2106 on: December 01, 2016, 03:32:14 PM »
We should have a new game called "Breitbart or Satire"


Wait guys I think they might be onto something here https://twitter.com/HouseScience/status/804402881982066688

"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline Boreas

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 2019
  • The wooden shoe conspiracy
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2107 on: December 03, 2016, 09:04:09 AM »
... the consequence of government meddling is a lot of blame and bitterness and further polarization of heartland against coast that could have been avoided by simply letting the economy run on its own.  Because there are people who know that there are people like you who say "increased expenses in the coal industry" like it's a social good, ...
Protecting the watershed and preventing mountaintop removal is to the public good. Coal could only be developed at a low cost if coal companies were allowed to externalize costs and destroy downstream communities. Coal was also failing due to new plant integration costs.
Habitat needs to be protected. What are you doing to protect habitat, Gramarye?

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2108 on: December 06, 2016, 05:57:43 PM »
Weather Channel vs. Briefbarf. Advantage: people educated in that of science....

Note to Breitbart: Earth Is Not Cooling, Climate Change Is Real and Please Stop Using Our Video to Mislead Americans
https://weather.com/news/news/breitbart-misleads-americans-climate-change?cm_ven=T_WX_CD_120616_2
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2109 on: December 28, 2016, 07:58:19 AM »
ALARMING: Arctic Temperature Soars 30 C Above Normal. This Doesn't Bode Well For The Future & Runaway #ClimateChange https://t.co/vQHiEXHtz2
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2110 on: January 17, 2017, 07:16:41 PM »
Uh, this seems to be not good https://t.co/HNFhfYlJk9
« Last Edit: January 17, 2017, 07:21:23 PM by KJP »
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline Foraker

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 464
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2111 on: January 18, 2017, 01:13:01 PM »


The "catch" here is the reference to "land temperatures."  Remember that the planet is mostly water, so land temperature can be far off the average global temperature, which continues to rise.  (And that's why land temperature isn't getting the same headlines.)

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2112 on: January 18, 2017, 01:23:09 PM »
The "catch" here is the reference to "land temperatures."  Remember that the planet is mostly water, so land temperature can be far off the average global temperature, which continues to rise.  (And that's why land temperature isn't getting the same headlines.)

I notice you didn't list the source of that. Allow me:
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/30/global-temperatures-plunge-icy-silence-climate-alarmists/

And their source was a British tabloid, the Daily Mail.

In other words, nothing to see here. Think, folks. Water doesn't warm on its own. It's heated by a warming atmosphere caused by excessive carbon retaining more and more of the sun's heat.

Maybe a little primer would be helpful?
https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/kids/impacts/signs/oceans.html
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline Brutus_buckeye

  • 665'-Queen City Square
  • ******
  • Posts: 968
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2113 on: January 18, 2017, 01:50:22 PM »
When it is 65 in January, I love me some climate change

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2114 on: January 19, 2017, 10:47:29 AM »
When it is 65 in January, I love me some climate change

Me too. It's the droughts and rising seas that bum me out.

BTW from Popular Science  (the subhead proves another theory --that scientists have a sense of humor)....

2016 WAS THE HOTTEST YEAR ON RECORD
THE TEMPS TRUMP ALL HISTORICAL RECORDS
http://www.popsci.com/2016-hottest-year-on-record-noaa
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline Gramarye

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4832
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2115 on: January 19, 2017, 11:42:40 AM »
On those "hottest year on record" numbers:

http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/18/nyt-hid-numbers-hottest-year-record/

Beat by 0.01C with a margin of error of 0.1C.  So it's not actually proven that it was the hottest year on record.

Though of course that does also mean that we basically statistically tied, either way.

Offline ryanlammi

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
  • Cultural Marxist
    • Flickr Profile
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2116 on: January 19, 2017, 12:09:07 PM »
^Statistically tied for "hottest year on record". Not statistically tied for average year on record. This is still a big deal.

And that Federalist article is pretty nitpicky about missing a number. The article wasn't about the individual year, it was about the trend this is a part of. The article isn't "2016 was the hottest on record". It was "Earth Sets a Temperature Record for the Third Straight Year".

They were talking about the trend, and even stated in quote: "A single warm year is something of a curiosity,” said Deke Arndt, chief of global climate monitoring for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “It’s really the trend, and the fact that we’re punching at the ceiling every year now, that is the real indicator that we’re undergoing big changes."

Keep thinking they "hid" that number from the public all you want. To the best of our ability, we measured this as the hottest year on record. That's not up for debate. So maybe it was the second hottest year or third hottest year. It's still keeping with the trend that 16 of the 17 hottest years on record have been since 2000. That's troubling.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2017, 12:09:19 PM by ryanlammi »
"We both would have looked silly if he came in, got out and came back in.”

- Tim Burke, Hamilton County Democratic Party Chairman

Flickr Profile

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2117 on: February 06, 2017, 12:19:24 AM »
Once-cautious #climate economist reverses course, issues warning against cost of inaction https://t.co/NSqgHAO9YX #divest https://t.co/dfaNRXcPv6
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Offline KJP

  • Premium Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35404
  • Rebuilding the cities that built America.
    • All Aboard Ohio
Re: Global Warming
« Reply #2118 on: February 09, 2017, 11:48:03 AM »
BNEF: US economy 'decoupled' from energy demand as renewables rise, emissions fall: https://t.co/24muT6kLsp
"Privilege is when you think that something's not a problem because it's not a problem for you personally."
--David Gaider

Remove Ads