Climate change. Face it. We're doomed.

ml1 said:
This is not a problem that is solvable by individual effort.   It's going to take commitments at the national level from our government to change the way we produce and consume energy.

And how do you suppose we get our government to do that?

It seems to me, that this thread has largely ignored one critical issue:

Currently per capita energy consumption (and thus contribution to global warming) in the US, Western Europe, Australia and a few other countries far exceeds the rest of the world.

In most of the rest of the world, there is a desire to achieve the same standard of living as in the USWEA.  That will require an enormous increase in energy consumption, which will accellerate the global warming many times over.  Thus, to truly tackle the issue, it is a question of:

1. Limiting what the have nots are allowed to do (and they won't like that).
2. Taking away from the haves (= us, and we won't like that).

• Imagine ACs being banned.  
• Imagine private vehicles being banned (let alone ATVs, Jet skis, etc.) in favor of mass transit.
• Imagine trucks being banned in favor of rail transportation.
• Imagine air fares subject to a 500% luxury tax.
• And so forth.

tomcat said:
It seems to me, that this thread has largely ignored one critical issue:
Currently per capita energy consumption (and thus contribution to global warming) in the US, Western Europe, Australia and a few other countries far exceeds the rest of the world.
In most of the rest of the world, there is a desire to achieve the same standard of living as in the USWEA.  That will require an enormous increase in energy consumption, which will accellerate the global warming many times over.  Thus, to truly tackle the issue, it is a question of:

1. Limiting what the have nots are allowed to do (and they won't like that).
2. Taking away from the haves (= us, and we won't like that).

• Imagine ACs being banned.  
• Imagine private vehicles being banned (let alone ATVs, Jet skis, etc.) in favor of mass transit.
• Imagine trucks being banned in favor of rail transportation.
• Imagine air fares subject to a 500% luxury tax.
• And so forth.

I am hoping for a technology solution in the form of more green energy and some sort of carbon capture options.

However, if things get bad enough, people will become desperate and will accept governments that take strong steps to limit consumption.  

It's funny though.  I wonder how many  people concerned about climate change have had central air installed recently or engage landscapers with their heavy machinery.

tjohn said:

tomcat said:
It seems to me, that this thread has largely ignored one critical issue:
Currently per capita energy consumption (and thus contribution to global warming) in the US, Western Europe, Australia and a few other countries far exceeds the rest of the world.
In most of the rest of the world, there is a desire to achieve the same standard of living as in the USWEA.  That will require an enormous increase in energy consumption, which will accellerate the global warming many times over.  Thus, to truly tackle the issue, it is a question of:

1. Limiting what the have nots are allowed to do (and they won't like that).
2. Taking away from the haves (= us, and we won't like that).

• Imagine ACs being banned.  
• Imagine private vehicles being banned (let alone ATVs, Jet skis, etc.) in favor of mass transit.
• Imagine trucks being banned in favor of rail transportation.
• Imagine air fares subject to a 500% luxury tax.
• And so forth.

I am hoping for a technology solution in the form of more green energy and some sort of carbon capture options.

 See:  https://revolution-green.com/stop-global-warming-by-blocking-the-sun/

Also see:  https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/sustainability-with-john-elkington/planet-stratosphere-titanium-dioxide-global-warming

Also:  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180813100246.htm

proeasdf said:
 See:  https://revolution-green.com/stop-global-warming-by-blocking-the-sun/
Also see:  https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/sustainability-with-john-elkington/planet-stratosphere-titanium-dioxide-global-warming
Also:  https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180813100246.htm

"We don't know who struck first, us or them, but we know that it was us that scorched the sky. At the time, they were dependent on solar power and it was believed that they would be unable to survive without an energy source as abundant as the sun."

We don't have to look at climate change to know we're doomed.   Look at who we elected to be president.

dave said:
We don't have to look at climate change to know we're doomed.   Look at who we elected to be president.

 Fool me once, shame on you. Elect that motherefukker twice, shame on all of us.

meanwhile, while we paid attention to other things, temperatures exceeded 100 degrees in the Arctic Circle, about 80 years ahead of schedule.

Amended:

“This dramatic warming of the Arctic up to triple-digit temperatures was not expected to happen [regularly, over the ocean] until 2100.”

(I wondered what was meant by “not expected to happen,” because it apparently happened a century ago, too, so I did some quick research.)

What happened a century ago? I could find no record of triple digit temperature prior to this one.

Fort Yukon in Alaska reported 100 degrees in 1915. There’s some dispute over the accuracy, but the clarification — that what the forecast for 2100 was talking about are regular readings over water — helped me regardless of what led me to it.