Climate change and what we should do about it

Discuss everything else: politics, society, culture, science, philosophy, ideas, etc.
User avatar
blackg
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1347
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1854

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by blackg » 8 months ago

That Guy wrote:
8 months ago
I remember in the late 90s, when I was in like grade 1 - 3 they were screeching at us kids about how by 2005 X would happen! It didn't. Then, in 2005 I remember my grade 7 teacher was forced to make an apology to his classes because of all his climate change doomsday shit. He showed us some apocalyptic movie from the 80s about how climate change would ruin the world by 2020. I can't remember what the movie was, but it's about this couple outrunning a mad max sort of society that has come about from climate change..
That was Mad Max.
Ringo, said the gringo

Grasshopper
Hair Loss Newbie
Hair Loss Newbie
Posts: 38
Joined: 9 months ago
Reputation: 138
Norwood: NW1
Regimen: finasteride 0.5mg, RU58841 2x40mg, Dermarolling bleeding weekly, Microdose minoxidil

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Grasshopper » 8 months ago

For me I don't see any conservative reasoning why not to invest right now in renewables.

Those times without wind/sun or too much energy consumption make renewables so expensive, because you have to catch them by burning expensive natural gas.
Electric cars make the perfect fit for renewables. They can catch surges of power needs by altering the charging speed, or even giving back 10% of the charge.

In the long run, renewables will be almost free, because they actually don't need any fuel to generate electricity.

We are walking into a golden age of really cheap energy. However the countries with the most experience will sell the technology behind it.
And right now it looks like those states will be California (Tesla), China (BYD) and to a limited degree northern Europe.

So this makes renewables viable for me even without clima change and China seems to think into this direction, too as they will ban gas powered cars by 2030.

As the Chinese car market is about 1/3 of the global market, savings through production volume demand a global switch to electric. Once one company controls 20% of the Chinese car market they can sell electric cars for < 15 000$ just through volume cost savings.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1733
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3778
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Head & Shoulders caffeine shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Admin » 8 months ago

In the following video, by far the most sensible approach to climate change (and to problems in general) I've heard of:



Beyond the "muh climate change is a conspiracy!" and the "we're all doomed unless we abandon all economic growth!" arguments.

It's about what we can do logically, practically and especially economically.

Hundreds of billions for approximately 1% positive impact in 100 years seems like a stupid idea to me.

User avatar
Xexos
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 582
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 608
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Finasteride 1.25 MG ED .. Tea Tree Shampoo 3x a week
Age: 19

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Xexos » 6 months ago

Climate change is not real to be honest.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1733
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3778
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Head & Shoulders caffeine shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Admin » 6 months ago

Stan22 wrote:
6 months ago
Climate change is not real to be honest.
I believe it is real, and part of it has been caused by human activities, but that part of the question is not very relevant anymore. Even if it's true that it's happening and that it is partly man-made, the questions we should be asking ourselves are:
  • Are the doomsday predictions of the ideologically possessed scientists and activists even accurate? They've played that game quite a few times now, telling us that the end of the world is once again 20-30 years away, and every time we get there, and nothing happens, they double-down and are like "well in 12 years, you'll see, it's going to be the end of the world!"
  • Even if all of it is true, what can realistically do about it without resorting to authoritarian measures that will bring us back to the bronze age? No electronics, no flights, no orders on the internet, no car. The current evidence shows that even if we do all that and invest 1000 billions on climate change, we're going to reduce man's impact on the environment by like 1% in 100 years.
This issue is really becoming a national psychosis in my country, I honestly think people get off those doomsday predictions because it allows them to bring out their inner tyrant to tell us "old bitter people who destroyed the planet" (yeah it's their go-to insult on Facebook, even directed at me, a 29 year old) what we should all do with our lives. It's getting seriously irritating to say the least, and those people will have to down it down at a point, especially with the yellow vests on the other side who truly have something to lose because of what they're fighting for.

I really hope the May 2019 elections in Belgium put those radical environmentalist back in their place. The media is already getting a boner over their certain landslide in the upcoming election because bruh, look at all those Belgians on the streets fighting for muh planet, they're like 30000 or something! Yeah yeah, except there are 11 million people in this country and the majority is fed up of being force-fed this climate change nonsense 24/7.

User avatar
Xexos
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 582
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 608
Norwood: NW1.5
Regimen: Finasteride 1.25 MG ED .. Tea Tree Shampoo 3x a week
Age: 19

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Xexos » 6 months ago

Admin wrote:
6 months ago
I believe it is real, and part of it has been caused by human activities, but that part of the question is not very relevant anymore. Even if it's true that it's happening and that it is partly man-made, the questions we should be asking ourselves are:
  • Are the doomsday predictions of the ideologically possessed scientists and activists even accurate? They've played that game quite a few times now, telling us that the end of the world is once again 20-30 years away, and every time we get there, and nothing happens, they double-down and are like "well in 12 years, you'll see, it's going to be the end of the world!"
  • Even if all of it is true, what can realistically do about it without resorting to authoritarian measures that will bring us back to the bronze age? No electronics, no flights, no orders on the internet, no car. The current evidence shows that even if we do all that and invest 1000 billions on climate change, we're going to reduce man's impact on the environment by like 1% in 100 years.
This issue is really becoming a national psychosis in my country, I honestly think people get off those doomsday predictions because it allows them to bring out their inner tyrant to tell us "old bitter people who destroyed the planet" (yeah it's their go-to insult on Facebook, even directed at me, a 29 year old) what we should all do with our lives. It's getting seriously irritating to say the least, and those people will have to down it down at a point, especially with the yellow vests on the other side who truly have something to lose because of what they're fighting for.

I really hope the May 2019 elections in Belgium put those radical environmentalist back in their place. The media is already getting a boner over their certain landslide in the upcoming election because bruh, look at all those Belgians on the streets fighting for muh planet, they're like 30000 or something! Yeah yeah, except there are 11 million people in this country and the majority is fed up of being force-fed this climate change nonsense 24/7.
I agree with you that humanity has fucked up a lot and ruined many aspects of this beautiful earth. I've not done much research on the subject to be honest so i can't say i have enough knowledge to back my claims and allow me to enter a decent debate.

Still, i'm a pretty skeptical individual, i always want observable and undeniable evidence.

And i also agree that the media, scientists, politicians, the public, really overreact too much when it comes to this. Always claiming that the earth is going to be destroyed by humans in like 10 years. I think it's a strategy from the government to make people afraid and scared all the time, and thus making people obey them without thinking much because fear blinds people and everyone doesn't want to die.

And about those people who care about other animals and planets more than their own species, they truly need to have a bullet in their heads. Yeah, i love animals and all that stuff, but how can you care about an animal more than another human being ? Your family, friends, girlfriend, are all humans. Humans have memories, emotions, brains, personalities, all of that is worth a lot.

Anyways, in my opinion this earth won't be destroyed anytime soon, at least it won't during our lifetimes.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1478
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3655
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 6 months ago

The world threw a sissy fit over the distribution of a few million refugees from Syria. It's hard to imagine what will happen if a billion people or more are displaced.

Ultimately it should come down to the science, which is robust and has been for a long time. Increasing CO2 emissions will raise global temperatures, and large temperature increases can eventually undermine human civilization.

It is unfortunate that people are abandoning science for voodoo. Aside from climate change denial, we have a growing anti-vaccination movement which is killing people, and as we know from this website, way too many people spending money on bogus supplements. There's a tarot card reader who has a store a few blocks from my house, I hate the people who spend money there.

Added in 4 minutes 11 seconds:
Admin wrote:
6 months ago
Are the doomsday predictions of the ideologically possessed scientists and activists even accurate? They've played that game quite a few times now, telling us that the end of the world is once again 20-30 years away, and every time we get there, and nothing happens
Were you even paying attention, 20-30 years ago?

The big issue at the time was the ozone hole, which was growing over the Southern Hemisphere. The ozone layer is important, as it helps protect life on Earth from a lot of harmful radiation. Scientists had identified that CFCs were contributing to ozone depletion, and thus much to the chagrin of industry, CFCs were banned or reduced. Fast-forward a couple decades, and the ozone layer is recovering.

The other big public health care was tobacco smoking. The link between smoking and lung cancer (and other illnesses) was overwhelmingly established, much to the chagrin of industry. However, the science was clear, and governments were more functional back then. Public health campaigns were launched, the tobacco companies were sued in part due to promoting fraudulent science that denied a link between smoking and lung cancer, and a few decades later, cigarette smoking is a lot less common.

I remember discussing these issues on conservative message boards. As recently as ten years ago, many right-wingers were denying the link between ozone depletion and CFCs, and between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. Today, they have moved on to denying some other basic science: the link between CO2 and global warming.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1733
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3778
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Head & Shoulders caffeine shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Admin » 6 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
6 months ago
The world threw a sissy fit over the distribution of a few million refugees from Syria. It's hard to imagine what will happen if a billion people or more are displaced.

Ultimately it should come down to the science, which is robust and has been for a long time. Increasing CO2 emissions will raise global temperatures, and large temperature increases can eventually undermine human civilization.

It is unfortunate that people are abandoning science for voodoo. Aside from climate change denial, we have a growing anti-vaccination movement which is killing people, and as we know from this website, way too many people spending money on bogus supplements. There's a tarot card reader who has a store a few blocks from my house, I hate the people who spend money there.
I despise the anti-vaxxers too, but I don't think they can be put on the same level as climate change. I'll believe the doomsday predictions when I see them, sorry, I don't believe there is evidence that large chunks of the world population will need to be moved (where? Well to the West of course!) because of a tiny increase in temperature.

No one should be able to tell us what to do based on those supposedly scientific predictions because they're just largely unreliable. I love me some science but let's not kid ourselves pretending that our understanding of the world is sufficient to predict what's going to happen in 50 years. And as I've said, there are now too many doomsday predictions made decades ago that were simply flat wrong.

I see it as ideological possession and magical thinking, you can't even go against those Tedx academics who vehemently tell us that we need to move third world population because of muh climate change, if you disagree, it's because you're a right-wing nazi monster, while their agenda is clear as day to anyone paying attention. They use their (incomplete and faulty) science to hold us hostage, sorry, not going to fly, I see what's happening.

Because yes, scientists can and do have an agenda too. Too many of them flirt with the left end of the political spectrum and I suspect it has something to do with their unrewarding salary, it makes them see Marxist policies as very appealing, I believe it's their own resentment coming up to the surface, something like "I've been underappreciated as a scientist, I got a shit salary so now I'm going to use the little power I have as an authority by trying to screw up the West! Guys listen to me, it's science! We need to import lots of people whose worldview is completely antithetical to the West's!"

Sorry, I got in hard here, but this is truly what I think is going on.

User avatar
JLBB
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 606
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1221
Norwood: NW1
Regimen: 0.25mg Finasteride

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by JLBB » 6 months ago

Grasshopper wrote:
8 months ago
For me I don't see any conservative reasoning why not to invest right now in renewables.

Those times without wind/sun or too much energy consumption make renewables so expensive, because you have to catch them by burning expensive natural gas.
Electric cars make the perfect fit for renewables. They can catch surges of power needs by altering the charging speed, or even giving back 10% of the charge.

In the long run, renewables will be almost free, because they actually don't need any fuel to generate electricity.

We are walking into a golden age of really cheap energy. However the countries with the most experience will sell the technology behind it.
And right now it looks like those states will be California (Tesla), China (BYD) and to a limited degree northern Europe.

So this makes renewables viable for me even without clima change and China seems to think into this direction, too as they will ban gas powered cars by 2030.

As the Chinese car market is about 1/3 of the global market, savings through production volume demand a global switch to electric. Once one company controls 20% of the Chinese car market they can sell electric cars for < 15 000$ just through volume cost savings.

You're an idiot that doesn't understand opportunity cost or a basic cost/benefit analysis then. Its indisputable that we could invest in renovating an entire energy grid with modern fossil fuel plants and cut more emissions and save more money than the maximum amount of viable wind/solar power. So why would we "invest" in implementation before the means exists to do so as so many countries have done with renewables with disastrous results in terms of prices? Nuclear is a middle ground in price and is a viable baseload energy source, no one on the left wants it. Maybe you're not smart enough to understand, but like in the hairloss industry, you can pour billions of dollars into research and it guarantees nothing. Public funding of scientists doesn't magically change the physical laws of reality or make things cheap.

"We are walking into a golden age of really cheap energy. However the countries with the most experience will sell the technology behind it."

Except there has been virtually no improvement in renewable energy production in a decade regarding viable pricing and stability for a viable economy with successful mass emissions cuts. There's still virtually a linear correlation between amount of wind and solar energy to increases in energy prices. This is despite the fact that in most Western countries relatively and literally renewables get significantly more subsidies than fossil fuels. Solar in particular is a minuscule aspect of production with outrageous percentages of subsidies, same case in most Western nations. No one is mentioning this however, or the fact that ultimately renewable energy is just another means of corporate interests making a dollar, by replacing cheap and reliable fossil fuels baseload with more a more expensive and less reliable source and charging higher prices. You and other idiots say we should invest in renewables; look at the fucking numbers, THE WEST IS INVESTING IN RENEWABLES, how can you say it isn't when its more highly subsidised than the fossil fuels industry in research and implementation?

"So this makes renewables viable for me even without climate change and China seems to think into this direction, too as they will ban gas powered cars by 2030."

They NEVER announced this so don't make up dogshit statistics, the date roughly suggested was 2040 and it wasn't a hard ban, it was a suggestion of phasing them out in the long term. The easiest way to understand oils future is to look at oil stocks. They're still priced such that the market expects an indefinite and continuous future in oil. There however has been no major price correction for the potential ban on gasoline vehicles. No dividend cuts, no falls in investment, and no drastic fall in share prices reflecting complete removal of gasoline vehicles from 2030-2040. Hmm I wonder why? Perhaps because the adults in the room actually staking money on this actually have researched and understand the potential to ban gas cars is an impossibility with current technology, unlike the dumb fuck dreamers without basic understanding of related facts in the general public, and equally moronic and virtue signalling politicians.

Try living in a city that tries to implement a full switch to renewable energy and completely phase out coal and see how you enjoy it. I was living in one and all that happened was we failed to cut emissions to any meaningful extent despite being a net exporter of energy, and prices hit among the highest in the entire world. Great fucking investments asshole.


"In the long run, renewables will be almost free, because they actually don't need any fuel to generate electricity."

Not even a basic fucking understanding of how renewable energy works. Renewable refers to the source, not the means of production. We aren't talking about a magical pizza, sunshine, rainbows and free energy tree here, this is the real world.

Added in 4 minutes 27 seconds:
Afro_Vacancy wrote:
6 months ago
The world threw a sissy fit over the distribution of a few million refugees from Syria. It's hard to imagine what will happen if a billion people or more are displaced.

Ultimately it should come down to the science, which is robust and has been for a long time. Increasing CO2 emissions will raise global temperatures, and large temperature increases can eventually undermine human civilization.

It is unfortunate that people are abandoning science for voodoo. Aside from climate change denial, we have a growing anti-vaccination movement which is killing people, and as we know from this website, way too many people spending money on bogus supplements. There's a tarot card reader who has a store a few blocks from my house, I hate the people who spend money there.

Added in 4 minutes 11 seconds:


Were you even paying attention, 20-30 years ago?

The big issue at the time was the ozone hole, which was growing over the Southern Hemisphere. The ozone layer is important, as it helps protect life on Earth from a lot of harmful radiation. Scientists had identified that CFCs were contributing to ozone depletion, and thus much to the chagrin of industry, CFCs were banned or reduced. Fast-forward a couple decades, and the ozone layer is recovering.

The other big public health care was tobacco smoking. The link between smoking and lung cancer (and other illnesses) was overwhelmingly established, much to the chagrin of industry. However, the science was clear, and governments were more functional back then. Public health campaigns were launched, the tobacco companies were sued in part due to promoting fraudulent science that denied a link between smoking and lung cancer, and a few decades later, cigarette smoking is a lot less common.

I remember discussing these issues on conservative message boards. As recently as ten years ago, many right-wingers were denying the link between ozone depletion and CFCs, and between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. Today, they have moved on to denying some other basic science: the link between CO2 and global warming.


The difference is that smoking and CFCs had viable solutions to ending the problems. The C02 one at this point does not no matter what you believe of the science or ability of scientists to accurately predict short, medium and long term climate trends, which they can't do. Its either praying for new technology to solve a problem by a factor of 1000 in terms of battery storage for example, or accepting a less stable and significantly more expensive energy grid. Not to mention various manufacturing hubs with cheap labour are doing nothing to actually genuinely cut emissions and will ignore the problem to remain competitive, as any sensible nation will do. Of course you'll mention China, however China have not cut emissions, so again until the hypothetical solutions actually bear fruit its a totally meaningless reference.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1478
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3655
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 6 months ago

Admin wrote:
6 months ago
I despise the anti-vaxxers too, but I don't think they can be put on the same level as climate change. I'll believe the doomsday predictions when I see them, sorry, I don't believe there is evidence that large chunks of the world population will need to be moved (where? Well to the West of course!) because of a tiny increase in temperature.
You can't have civilization without predictions and without planning.

If you read the Bible, you'll learn that the pharaoh kept stores of grain as protection in case of a future drought.

As for people being moved, it's not that hard, any group of people living in areas that are not significantly above sea level will be moved.
Admin wrote:
6 months ago
No one should be able to tell us what to do based on those supposedly scientific predictions because they're just largely unreliable. I love me some science but let's not kid ourselves pretending that our understanding of the world is sufficient to predict what's going to happen in 50 years. And as I've said, there are now too many doomsday predictions made decades ago that were simply flat wrong.

Because yes, scientists can and do have an agenda too. Too many of them flirt with the left end of the political spectrum and I suspect it has something to do with their unrewarding salary, it makes them see Marxist policies as very appealing, I believe it's their own resentment coming up to the surface, something like "I've been underappreciated as a scientist, I got a shit salary so now I'm going to use the little power I have as an authority by trying to screw up the West! Guys listen to me, it's science! We need to import lots of people whose worldview is completely antithetical to the West's!"

Sorry, I got in hard here, but this is truly what I think is going on.
Climate change has nothing to do with "the left". It was first predicted by the Swedish physicist Svante Arrhenius, roughly a century ago. He had a lot of conservative views.

You are, surprisingly, being a strict social constructionist. That is an unusual role reversal for us. So I'll be clear about what I think: A proton weighs 1837x as much as an electron; the Sun is ~300,000x more massive than the Earth; Water freezes at about 0 celsius with some variation due to air pressure; smoking increases the risk of lung cancer; ... and the validity of all of these statements are completely independent of politics. The same numbers would be discovered by people living in a different society, or by intelligent aliens with different politics.

Increasing CO2 levels will, similarly, raise global temperatures.

User avatar
Murkey Thumb
Hair Loss Rookie
Hair Loss Rookie
Posts: 159
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 310
Norwood: NW4

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Murkey Thumb » 6 months ago

When I was a kid(many, many, years ago in long distant history) We were all told in school and on the news that a new ice age was coming; which terrified half the population of the UK because its cold enough here already!

Of course it didn't happen because we didn't really have any idea that we were about to live through a period of neo-liberalism and globalisation which effectively created global warming within a generation. There are ways to reverse it but I doubt any modern country would be able to stomach the political/social ramifications. Personally I wouldn't mind eating only seasonal UK made food as I don't see any benefits from Israeli Apples & Dutch tomatoes (although I am partial to Spanish oranges).

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1478
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3655
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 6 months ago

Murkey Thumb wrote:
6 months ago
When I was a kid(many, many, years ago in long distant history) We were all told in school and on the news that a new ice age was coming;
You were not all told that in school, as there was never any consensus that an ice age was imminent. Perhaps you were in a particularly bad school.

People did however investigate the possibility, which was a reasonable thing to do. The present conclusion is that an ice age is on the way, in roughly 50,000 years.

Added in 17 minutes 54 seconds:
JLBB wrote:
6 months ago
ability of scientists to accurately predict short, medium and long term climate trends, which they can't do.
Image

I'll stick to telling the truth, the climate models are doing reasonably well. They really exploded on the public consciousness in the 1990s, which is Also when they underwent significant improvements due to faster computers. And indeed, during that (admittedly) brief period, they have been more correct than incorrect, temperatures are in fact rising, and we're seeing an increase in sea levels. I just looked up the numbers -- we've had a 7cm sea level rise in the past twenty years. That's actually more than I thought that it was.

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevel.html

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1733
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3778
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Head & Shoulders caffeine shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Admin » 6 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
6 months ago
And indeed, during that (admittedly) brief period, they have been more correct than incorrect, temperatures are in fact rising, and we're seeing an increase in sea levels. I just looked up the numbers -- we've had a 7cm sea level rise in the past twenty years. That's actually more than I thought that it was.

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevel.html
Then people will just move farther away from the shores. Why the need to go all doomsday about it.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1478
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3655
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 6 months ago

Admin wrote:
6 months ago
Then people will just move farther away from the shores. Why the need to go all doomsday about it.
In a post above you wrote that you estimated the cost of compliance with IPCC recommendations at 1 trillion dollars. That left you aghast. Now you are saying that you're ok with abandoning a huge fraction of the world's coastal cities. That doesn't add up at all.

This website lists the effects of both a modest and a maximal rise of sea levels. I'm skeptical that the latter could happen, but for the former, we could see the displacement of ~100 million people. The costs of that would far exceed your 1 trillion dollar estimate.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1733
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3778
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Head & Shoulders caffeine shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: Climate change and what we should do about it

Post by Admin » 6 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
6 months ago
In a post above you wrote that you estimated the cost of compliance with IPCC recommendations at 1 trillion dollars. That left you aghast. Now you are saying that you're ok with abandoning a huge fraction of the world's coastal cities. That doesn't add up at all.

This website lists the effects of both a modest and a maximal rise of sea levels. I'm skeptical that the latter could happen, but for the former, we could see the displacement of ~100 million people. The costs of that would far exceed your 1 trillion dollar estimate.
There's a big difference between spending a trillion dollars foe preventive measures that are almost certain not to do anything due to the extremely limited capacity we have to predict the future in any reliable manner and effecticely spend that money to move people when and if the sea levels ever rise to the point that the coasts get flooded.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest