1. OCAU Merchandise is available! Check out our 20th Anniversary Mugs, Classic Logo Shirts and much more! Discussion in this thread.
    Dismiss Notice

Consolidated Climate Change/CO2/Global Warming Thread

Discussion in 'Science' started by hlokk, Feb 12, 2007.

  1. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney
    Putting population growth into perspective.

    http://www.livescience.com/52289-pope-climate-call-misses-population-problem.html
     
  2. dr_deathy

    dr_deathy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,962
    So don't want to talk about SO2?

    You also need a data set that doesn't include USA. But i suppose thats only 25% or so of energy usage for not even 10% of the population and with china taking over a lot of their own emissions its even worse.

    How many people die a year from coal? Do you even know?

    BUT WHY IS IT GOOD TO HAVE 8 BILLION???? WHY????
     
  3. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney
    Sure, coal kills people, but the reality is that creates or saves far more than it kills. Food will kill you too if you eat too much.

    And of course it's not good to have a population of 8 billion, rising 11.

    Population has been the elephant in the room for several decades but nobody dares mention it.
     
  4. samos

    samos Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    8,593
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Lol, did you watch Roberts talk on Q&A v. Brian Cox? :shock:


    Yeah, I guess it's a good thing we extend that habitable area, for all the others who will be displaced with rising sea levels.

    So you're suggesting we just keep on keeping on? :Paranoid:
     
  5. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney
    Firstly, my respect for Brian Cox was somewhat dented after seeing transcripts from a BBC talk back program, where he stated that the visible phases of the moon were due to shadowing from the earth. wtf? He may well be very knowledgeable in his area of expertise, but in other areas, definitely not, and as a climate scientist he's no more or less an authority than David Suzuki, Tim Flannery, or even Andrew Bolt or Alan Jones for that matter.

    Secondly, rising sea level is definitely a problem, however the rate of MSL rise is is less than 2mm per year, which is sufficiently slow enough for human adaptation. As it is today, people movements due to non-climate related causes outweighs climate related causes by more than 1,000,000 to 1, and I can't see that changing any time soon.

    Thirdly, I suggest a great many things, apparently, and without even knowing it most of the time, but what I think we should or shouldn't do about the climate is hardly relevant, and assigning relevance to me personally is flattering but very misguided IMHO.

    As a climate change realist, I'm less focused on what people say we should or shouldn't be doing than I am on working out what the most likely outcomes will actually be.
     
  6. RobRoySyd

    RobRoySyd Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    8,251
    Location:
    Sydney
    MSL rise is now more than 2mm per year, around 4mm I think.
    People movements caused by climate change today is huge, the war in Syria is the product of climate change. I would expect this to get worse as aquifers run dry in other regions.

    Outcomes can be very difficult to predict if we include human responses in the models.

    Some good news:

    Plants key to recent pause in growth rate of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

     
  7. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney
    The Middle East hardly needed climate change to spark a war. I find it very difficult to subscribe to that theory, which imo deserves to be filed in the basket of other deplorable theories that assert that climate change is responsible for pretty much everything that's wrong with the world.



    Maybe. The rate of change of CO2 accumulation tracks sea surface temps very well too, which was highlighted by the recent super El Nino.

    There is logically a negative feedback effect from increased photosynthesis, but that is, or should be, fully expected. It's been known for a very long time that plant growth accelerates with atmospheric CO2 up to about 2000 ppm.
     
  8. Walshy

    Walshy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Messages:
    353
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Perhaps not, but a significant drought, made far more likely by climate change, that devastated agriculture in the area and led to large displaced populations being mistreated by their governments may have helped a little...
    Not to mention the whole "Arab Spring" was triggered by food riots in Tunisia, which were a result of high prices caused by the Russians not exporting wheat, which was a result of a once-in-a-thousand-year heatwave/drought/wildfires which devastated the Russian wheat crop.

    So, yeah, totally unrelated to climate... :rolleyes:

    Tamino does a nice demolition of the argument for a 'pause' (or at least a decrease in acceleration) of CO2 concentration increase here.
    TL;DR: there's no statistically significant evidence of any pause or even reduction of acceleration of atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

    You forgot the other required part of that "CO2 fertilisation" argument: all other factors being equal.

    Unfortunately, increased CO2 comes along with, you know, climate change: hotter summers, more severe droughts & heatwaves, more intense rainstorms, wildfires, pests, diseases, and the like. All of which can be devastating to plant growth, especially in cool temperate regions which are the largest carbon sink as the trees re-grow foliage every spring & summer. Although the wildfires in Indonesia last summer were pretty bad, too, in terms of biomass being burned - especially the peat swamps, where a couple (tens?) of thousand years worth of carbon accumulation went up in smoke in a few weeks.

    And good luck getting your crops to grow when the rain shifts a thousand kilometres poleward... (just ask farmers in the south-west of Western Australia how well climate change has improved their crop yields over the past 30 years... the ocean off to the south is sure getting plenty more rain, though...)
     
  9. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney
    Even if that was the case, that would be 'weather', not 'climate', but regardless, it goes without saying that any country that relies so heavily on food imports to feed its population is a disaster waiting to happen.


    There's a diversity of opinion among scientists but most of it is explained by the time interval of the observed changes being examined. There's no reason why annual or decadal changes in temperature or CO2 respiration cannot occur when it's known that both are modulated by natural cycles and sporadic volcanic events.


    Climate change results in regional changes that may or may not reflect global change.

    Overall, the globe is getting greener due to the increased atmospheric CO2, and even if the same applies to Australia as a whole it doesn't mean that some areas will not show the opposite sign.

    Also, there are factors other than Atmospheric CO2 that affect regional climates. Some of these include land clearing (deforestation) and ozone levels above the poles, both of which are implicated in the observed changes in the SW of WA since the mid 1970's.

    Unfortunately, there's a growing tendency to blindly assume that atmospheric CO2 concentrations are the root cause of all regional climate changes.
     
  10. RobRoySyd

    RobRoySyd Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    8,251
    Location:
    Sydney
    Much of the greening is from grasses and in part at least some of it is due to changing rainfall patterns. From what I can read the response of various plants to changes in CO2 levels is a mixed bag, certainly not all thrive at up to 2,000 PPM.


    For sure climate change has bought down empires long, long before the industrial revolution. I'd add that despite how it gets spun not every extreme weather event can be attributed to climate change. That said it's undeniable that our planet is warming, the systems that drive our weather patterns are more energetic and hence more dynamic. None of this would be so troubling if it wasn't for all the other challenges such as resource depletion and a still growing population.
     
  11. Walshy

    Walshy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2002
    Messages:
    353
    Location:
    Brisbane
    And remembering that 'weather' is natural short-term variations about the climatic means, do you not accept that moving those means into untenable territory can have drastic consequences?

    For instance, that Russian heatwave was estimated to be a once-in-a-thousand-years event, if the climate were more like the 19th / early 20th century climate. In 2010, on the other hand, it was estimated to be about a 1-in-200 to 1-in-300 event.

    Yes, this means it was a freak weather event, very rare. It also means it was three to five times more likely to occur because of climate change.

    Saying that "you cannot say climate change caused X" is disingenuous, because the argument coming from climate scientists is more like "climate change makes X far more likely to occur than otherwise". And when you're dealing with the far extremes, the probabilities are so low that a relatively small climate shift can result in increased odds of 30-50 times what they were before. Or more!

    As for nations being 'reliant on external food supply' - well, Australia's not reliant on external gas supply, is it? Yet what happens in global markets certainly affects the price we pay domestically.

    Having one of the world's largest exporters of wheat suddenly disappear from the market kinda had an inflationary effect on prices... You wouldn't need to import much food for that to have a flow-on effect on domestic prices. It's also not hard to imagine a drought or other severe weather impairing domestic production to the point where normally self-sufficient countries would need to import food, exposing their domestic market to international spot pricing.
     
  12. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney

    The reality is that there's no clear evidence that weather events have become either more extreme or more frequent with 1 degree of warming.

    Prof. Roger Peilke Jn of Colorado University has specialised in the research extreme weather events and concluded that there's a slight negative trend since 1930.

    That may or may not change into the future, but the fact remains that no weather events can be attributed to the 1 degree of warming that's been observed sine the beginning of the last century.

    If you look at the raw data across Australia, most of the high temperature records being broken in recent times are occurring in urban areas with UHI contamination. The continental record is still 50.7 degrees recorded in 1960 in SA, before global warming became evident.

    The highest globally was recorded in Death Valley in 1913.
     
  13. RobRoySyd

    RobRoySyd Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    8,251
    Location:
    Sydney
    Not from I can read from his published results. They only refer to the east coast of the USA.

    What Does the Peer-Reviewed Literature Say About Trends in East Coast Winter Storms?

    Peilke is very clear that he takes no exception to anything from the IPCC, what he has had much to say about is incorrect attribution.

    And yet our winegrowers are being affected by climate change.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-11/wine-producers-face-climate-change-challenge-in-orange/7830280

     
  14. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney
  15. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney


    ..........................
     
  16. RobRoySyd

    RobRoySyd Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    8,251
    Location:
    Sydney
    From the same article:

    Also from NOAA it's revealed that the amount of energy in the upper 700 feet of our oceans has increase by approximately 150 x 1021 joules over the past two decades. A joule isn't much energy but 150 x 1021 joules is a massive amount of energy, around the same order of magnitude of all energy used by all humans over a year ( 104,426 TWh in 2015).


    Your position seems to be that if a few holes can be found in the IPCC studies or other's reports then the whole AGW problem will go away That's an absurd position to take and all such reasoning has been comprehensively debunked years ago.

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/07/no-man-is-an-urban-heat-island/

    I'd certainly agree that there's no extreme weather event that can be attributed to AGW. I'd also agree that it's still too early to say for sure that there's been enough of them over a long enough period of time to say the predicted increase in frequency is proven. If you want to wait until then, that's a reckless position to take. We're already failing to do anything that's going to slow down the increase in atmospheric CO2. The longer we wait to act the harder the problem becomes to address and even then, whatever change in climate occurs will remain for a very long time. All we can hope to achieve is preventing it getting worse.

    If you want to dig deep into real science then you can find a much more disconcerting aspect of AGW, we don't yet know how to fix the problem and we don't have much if any time to find a solution.
     
  17. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney
    But still a small fraction of 1% of the energy that's already in the oceans, so it's trivial.


    Fwiw, I don't have a position, but it's worth noting that Roger Pielke Jr was a contributor to IPCC AR5 and his conclusions are endorsed by the greater scientific community.



    My argument isn't about action or inaction to address man's impact on the climate. I'm merely pointing out the lack of evidence to suggest that extreme weather events have increased in frequency or intensity with one degree C of warming. Of course, there's no shortage of mainstream media reports that erroneously construct such links in order to sell a news story.

    Not surprisingly, people are choosing to ignore the mainstream media.
     
  18. clonex

    clonex Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    24,884
    Location:
    north pole
    wasnt 2010/2011 winter the coldest in few hundred years as well?
     
  19. Diamond dude

    Diamond dude Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Sydney
    Christmas message to kids, Fairfax style.


    If they really care about the kids of this world, as they claim, why don't the Greens and socialists simply move Santa to the south pole, where there's still about 4km of ice? And not to mention the tens of thousands of emperor penguins that are available to help pull the sleigh.

    Seems like they're deliberately killing Santa so that they can fully implement their happy holiday agenda around the world. Clearly they're a sneaky sinister lot.

    Fortunately, there are still some kind and generous people like Dick Smith who will come to Santa's rescue when it's needed , and restore hope to the millions of kids around the world.
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2016
  20. kally

    kally Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2002
    Messages:
    1,032
    Location:
    Fremantle

Share This Page

Advertisement: