Climate breakdown and housing strategy

[PeanutButter]

Siberia 48C / 118F

Now tell me again how we shouldn't be planning for extreme climate chaos within our lifetimes?

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9720627/Record-breaking-heatwave-temperatures-118F-hits-SIBERIA.html

[Saving For a Space Ship]

3 hours ago, PeanutButter said:

Siberia 48C / 118F

Now tell me again how we shouldn't be planning for extreme climate chaos within our lifetimes?

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9720627/Record-breaking-heatwave-temperatures-118F-hits-SIBERIA.html

Hotter than the human body can handle: Pakistan city broils in world’s highest temperatures Experts fear Jacobabad's extreme heat and humidity may worsen with climate change – and that other cities may join the club https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/climate-and-people/hotter-human-body-can-handle-pakistan-city-broils-worlds-highest/

[byron78]

Frankly anyone still denying Climate Change makes absolutely no sense to me.

[dugsbody]

32 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Frankly anyone still denying Climate Change makes absolutely no sense to me.

They've moved on some time ago when the evidence became too much for them. Now they just deny it is man made.

[byron78]

1 minute ago, dugsbody said:

They've moved on some time ago when the evidence became too much for them. Now they just deny it is man made.

It's the sun! (Cooling since 1970s). 

It's immigrants! (probably).

Idiots will be idiots, eh?

[PeanutButter]

There used to be loads of climate change deniers on here, always spouting graphs and talking about the mini ice age. 

 

[PeanutButter]

Miami condo collapse prompts questions over role of climate change

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/29/miami-condo-collapse-questions-climate-change

[Saving For a Space Ship]

Canada is out ? 

I can't believe I am writing this. Canada Flag of Canada has obliterated its national all-time heat record *for the second day in a row*.

Before yesterday, greater than 45°C had never been recorded. As far as climatology is concerned, this is deeply shocking.

https://twitter.com/ScottDuncanWX/status/1409737823943528448

 

 

[skinnylattej]

21 hours ago, PeanutButter said:

Siberia 48C / 118F

Now tell me again how we shouldn't be planning for extreme climate chaos within our lifetimes?

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9720627/Record-breaking-heatwave-temperatures-118F-hits-SIBERIA.html

48C in Siberia, should be good for release of methane from the permafrost.

IMV methane release could be the critical tipping point, hopefully a long way off.

[PeanutButter]

1 hour ago, skinnylattej said:

48C in Siberia, should be good for release of methane from the permafrost.

IMV methane release could be the critical tipping point, hopefully a long way off.

Most of the climate scientists I read are very pessimistic. 

If I was in UK govt now I’d be banging on for major infrastructure changes and shoring up borders. But lol I’m not a psychopath narcissist MP.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/30/canada-heatwave-dozens-dead-as-searing-plus-40c-temperatures-grips-vancouver

There’s no going back now, it’s just a case of mitigating how extremely bad it gets. 2.5C better than 3C etc. 

[skinnylattej]

1 hour ago, PeanutButter said:

Most of the climate scientists I read are very pessimistic. 

If I was in UK govt now I’d be banging on for major infrastructure changes and shoring up borders. But lol I’m not a psychopath narcissist MP.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/30/canada-heatwave-dozens-dead-as-searing-plus-40c-temperatures-grips-vancouver

There’s no going back now, it’s just a case of mitigating how extremely bad it gets. 2.5C better than 3C etc. 

I agree that the risk of severe consequences of climate change is high.  The only way to reduce impact is rapid reduction in CO2 emissions, which unless the population demands it, will not happen.  Net zero by 2050 is too little too late, but good for COP 26, which will be a lot of words and no action.

I am surprised/disappointed/frustrated that the younger generation aren't more involved, as they will have to deal with the oncoming disasters: especially migration and agriculture.

[Riedquat]

Well if you want any change you need to have a vision of the future that doesn't look about as appealing as the one you say you're trying to prevent. Because as of now the solutions make an early grave look like the most appealing option.

[PeanutButter]

1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

Well if you want any change you need to have a vision of the future that doesn't look about as appealing as the one you say you're trying to prevent. Because as of now the solutions make an early grave look like the most appealing option.

So we have to lie and promise utopia in order to combat apathy?  

1 hour ago, skinnylattej said:

I am surprised/disappointed/frustrated that the younger generation aren't more involved, as they will have to deal with the oncoming disasters: especially migration and agriculture.

The younger generation are quite vocal, I believe. But they're completely powerless, just as Gen X and Millennials are to the Boomers. I wonder if this helps to explain their extreme self-obsession, their identity fetishising - the real world is too scary and overwhelming and ending anyway, so why not spend 18 hours a day pretending you're a battle elf, and the other 6 dressing as a very offended, pink haired, genderfluid rabbit. 

[byron78]

1 hour ago, Riedquat said:

Well if you want any change you need to have a vision of the future that doesn't look about as appealing as the one you say you're trying to prevent. Because as of now the solutions make an early grave look like the most appealing option.

It's interesting to me, coming from a family who made most of their money during the Industrial Revolution.

Exactly the same arguments against cleaning up and moving toward newer tech were made back then! (Good money spent denying the issues too, of course).

[Riedquat]

1 hour ago, PeanutButter said:

So we have to lie and promise utopia in order to combat apathy?

Where did I say that? But do you seriously expect me to get behind something that has no appeal whatsoever, and whose supporters don't even have the basic decency to call a necessary evil? They're generally the ones who portray it as utopia.

[Riedquat]

1 hour ago, byron78 said:

It's interesting to me, coming from a family who made most of their money during the Industrial Revolution.

Exactly the same arguments against cleaning up and moving toward newer tech were made back then! (Good money spent denying the issues too, of course).

I've not denied the issues.

That was then. This is now. Different time, different problem, different "solution."

But I guess it's much easier to attack people that don't like your change than accept that it'll create a much worse world for some than the one they currently live in, making an unforgiveable mess of the place. As I said in the last post, too much hubris to even accept it on the "necessary evil" basis - nope, it's all great, so fvck anyone who finds it thoroughly loathsome.

Funny how those who bang on the most about saving the world are so often big on that as a concept but appear to have absolutely no appreciation of it whatsoever on the ground.

There's nothing to actually look forward to in this future.

Edited June 30, 2021 by Riedquat

[byron78]

26 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

I've not denied the issues.

That was then. This is now. Different time, different problem, different "solution."

But I guess it's much easier to attack people that don't like your change than accept that it'll create a much worse world for some than the one they currently live in, making an unforgiveable mess of the place. As I said in the last post, too much hubris to even accept it on the "necessary evil" basis - nope, it's all great, so fvck anyone who finds it thoroughly loathsome.

Funny how those who bang on the most about saving the world are so often big on that as a concept but appear to have absolutely no appreciation of it whatsoever on the ground.

There's nothing to actually look forward to in this future.

According to whom will this all become hell on Earth?

Surely not media controlled by countries and individuals with heavily vested interests in fossil fuels?

As for unforgivable messes, well it looks like Florida is going to fall into the sea, and the migrant crisis is only going to get worse as the equator becomes unlivable.

[Riedquat]

Right - there's no positive vision of the future.

"Hell on Earth" is quite an exaggeration of what I said. But the change is almost all negative - I can't see much hope for anything other than the continual erosion of what I love and care about in life. I don't expect you to agree - everyone cares about different things after all - but I do expect being able to empathise with the idea that it's an extremely unappealing vision of the future even if you don't sympathise with it. People are rarely willing to even try that - much easier to dismiss people than accept that what you want might hurt someone else. No sense of guilt then, you can carry on pushing your position without bothering the conscience (that's a generic "you" BTW, not a personal one).

Edited June 30, 2021 by Riedquat

[debtlessmanc]

19 hours ago, Saving For a Space Ship said:

Canada is out ? 

I can't believe I am writing this. Canada Flag of Canada has obliterated its national all-time heat record *for the second day in a row*.

Before yesterday, greater than 45°C had never been recorded. As far as climatology is concerned, this is deeply shocking.

https://twitter.com/ScottDuncanWX/status/1409737823943528448

 

 

Its getting worse, hit >49 oC in British Columbia yestreday, this is pushing the limits of what humans can take

to get back on topic- house price crash in Vancouver?

 

Edited June 30, 2021 by debtlessmanc

[PeanutButter]

2 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Where did I say that? But do you seriously expect me to get behind something that has no appeal whatsoever, and whose supporters don't even have the basic decency to call a necessary evil? They're generally the ones who portray it as utopia.

I don't expect anything of you  

[PeanutButter]

2 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

Its getting worse, hit >49 oC in British Columbia yestreday, this is pushing the limits of what humans can take

to get back on topic- high price crash in Vancouver?

Until the recent house price highs it was commonly listed as one of the best places to live...

I maintain that we will see house price falls (dare I say crashes?) in those places most affected by climate chaos in the next few decades. Even Glasgow is running the numbers https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/29/billions-needed-to-protect-glasgow-from-climate-effects-report-says and coming up with a sad face emoji. 

Useful map HERE https://www.cdp.net/en/research/global-reports/cities-at-risk 

 

 

[skinnylattej]

22 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Well if you want any change you need to have a vision of the future that doesn't look about as appealing as the one you say you're trying to prevent. Because as of now the solutions make an early grave look like the most appealing option.

The future beyond 2050 is the future that we choose now.  Existing CO2 emissions mean that the climate leading to 2050 is pretty much fixed.  Beyond 2050, the future will be heavily influenced by the choices that we make now.  Will these choices lead to Utopia, no they won't, but they can offer less damaging outcomes.  Fast reductions in CO2 emissions will result in less damage to agriculture, and in term, fewer climate refugees from sub-Saharan Africa and also from places that are vulnerable to sea level rise such as Bangladesh and Vietnam.  The industrialised world is responsible for most of the CO2 emissions, and thus, in my view, should take most of the actions to reduce emissions.

The available futures are going to be dependent on the CO2 level in the atmosphere, so we can, at one extreme, continue with business as usual and face a post 2050 temperature increase of >2.5C, with all the negative consequences for agriculture, disease migration, and high climatic instability.  At the other extreme is fast reduction in CO2 emissions that will minimise temperature rise post 2050, but the costs will have to be borne by the wealthy high emitting countries.  This is a choice, as most of the technical solutions are available.

So there is are moral and equality dimensions to the predicament of climate change in the allocation of future CO2 emissions.  I believe that an increasing share of a diminishing 'emissions cake' should be allocated to developing countries to raise their standard of living to an acceptable level.  This will also reduce the number of climate refugees.

My vision of the future for the industrialised countries would be a very low emissions future, with less flying, electric cars, and a substantially plant-based diet.  For the developing countries, the abolition of hunger and marked reductions in child mortality.  Thus, for the industrialised countries, we are not going to agree, as I have a positive view of the future that could be very different from today. But the future post 2050 will be the future we choose today.

I am saddened that you have such a downbeat view of the future and I wish you well.

 

[Riedquat]

I'm not arguing against any of that - I'm not a climate change denier. But it paints a picture (well, dealing with it does) of a future that I really do not want to live in, and doing nothing does too. I find the present depressing enough.

[winkie]

Climate change can only mean humans will want to move to more temperate climates.......

[skinnylattej]

3 hours ago, winkie said:

Climate change can only mean humans will want to move to more temperate climates.......

The Home Secretary gets upset with 8000 people arriving in dinghies, so Lord knows what it will be like when there are 100 million moving North from Africa.  Summer peak temperatures for the Middle East are pretty bad as well, so Greece, Syria, the Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq will be desperate.

Something else to consider is the vast infrastructure of the oil industry in the Gulf states.  Already some of the polymerisation plants have to slow production because of high air temperatures.

However, Scotland may become more appealing!