• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

How climate change is rapidly taking the planet apart and towards human extinction

Status
Not open for further replies.

Famassu

Member
So what can be expected in terms of consequences? Like a year by year time table. This summer has been extremely weird so far in the north east. There have been bouts of rain almost every day, while before it would shower a day or two at a time, once or twice a week.
Lots of ecosystems will/might crash hard, taking down their ability to support (such large numbers of) humans as well, leading to uncertainty, disarray, chaos & maybe even (more) wars in many regions as people start battling over things like clean(ish) water, still arable land and such. We already see this starting in places like California where their ability to produce food is starting to get severely affected by long-lasting droughts. This has just been the beginning, California might end up suffering from near endless decades long drought, if some worst case scenarios come true. That's quite a lot of food that won't get produced, because California can't support much in the way of farming & agriculture anymore.
 

Maxim726X

Member
o-INHOFE-SNOWBALL-facebook.jpg


It doesn't matter what evidence you bring.

The only time the general population will accept this is when it's too late.
 

Lime

Member
For US citizens in this thread - click the link to interact with the dynamic map

Screen-Shot-2016-05-03-at-10-1024x684.jpg


Despite the actions of a notable few pushing — at times even in a bipartisan fashion — for climate action, meaningful legislation addressing climate change is dead on arrival in the current Congress. President Obama is doing what he can in the executive branch under existing legislation to cut emissions from electricity generation through the Clean Power Plan and transportation through stronger CAFE standards, for example.

Yet much of the real climate action — and inaction — takes place at the state level. Some governors decide to defend renewable energy standards, like Montana Gov. Steve Bullock (D), or advocate for easy access to solar energy, like Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton (D). Others, like Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R), roll back renewable energy standards or sign solar fee bills like Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R).

Some attorneys general are pursuing legal action against oil giant ExxonMobil for misleading the public and investors on what it knew about the dangers of climate change, like New York’s Eric Schneiderman (D). Others — over two dozen in fact, are suing the EPA over the president’s Clean Power Plan

The CAPAF research found that governors and attorneys general who block climate action have received a total of $23,862,25 in campaign contributions from the dirty energy industry, including oil, gas, and coal. This is the first time the research has totaled political contributions from state lawmakers.

It has been a year since this research was last conducted, and since then five more governors have revealed themselves to be climate deniers in their public statements. Newly-elected Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin (R) added himself to the list when he said during a gubernatorial debate there has been “a lot of fluff and theory that has been perpetrated as science to create the perception that somehow this global warming has been entirely man-made.” West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin (D), also made this year’s list as the lone Democrat among the 24 deniers.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/04/3774746/governors-ags-climate-research/
 

Kthulhu

Member
Good thing none of us are in charge then.

My main complaint is action. People love to talk around the subject, specifically bashing the nay sayers and "people in charge". What is the individual doing? It's a problem everyone wants to blame someone else for. In reality, no one wants to give up the comforts we have.

How is voting for politicians that believe in climate not action?
 

AYF 001

Member
Serious question:
If the fossil fuel industry "disappears" as they say... How does the world work?
Or are we spelling the death of our current lives?

No fossil fuels mean many of the conveniences we take for granted (like plastics for cell phones and computers) disappear too...

No easy way to get across town without gasoline in the car... I guess we're walking to work?

I'm not being a climate change denier, I'm simply asking how everyone expects the population at large to react with government enforced eradication of how they've lived their lives for the entirety of my lifetime...
You're familiar with Mad Max, aren't you?
 
Good thing none of us are in charge then.

My main complaint is action. People love to talk around the subject, specifically bashing the nay sayers and "people in charge". What is the individual doing? It's a problem everyone wants to blame someone else for. In reality, no one wants to give up the comforts we have.
For a lot of things, we don't have to give up our comforts. Unless that comfort is an unobstructed view of the ocean, because we don't want wind farms in view or something.

Energy production and transportation can be done with a lot less fossil fuel then now. We even have the technology for it, either in renewables or nuclear. Yet we use a ton of coal, gas and oil for this.
 

KrellRell

Member
For a lot of things, we don't have to give up our comforts. Unless that comfort is an unobstructed view of the ocean, because we don't want wind farms in view or something.

Energy production and transportation can be done with a lot less fossil fuel then now. We even have the technology for it, either in renewables or nuclear. Yet we use a ton of coal, gas and oil for this.

Speak for yourself, I live in Canada. Although, as you will see the transition to renewables comes at a cost.
 
This is why I am considering not having children.

I won't be. I'm not going to judge anyone else, having kids is what we do, everyone knows (or assumes) their ability to raise another human being, but my personal perspective is that it would be irresponsible of me. This isn't a decision I've taken lightly or come to recently, but it's one I've found little reason to change as the years pass.
 

Kthulhu

Member
Which is?
I feel like I missed that part of the article.
All I read was that the world is dying and the only way to fix it is to tax the shit out of fossil fuels till they go away and put $192 trillion into research and hope that comes up with something?

Sounds like a Donald Trump speech, doom and gloom and no real solutions.

We have multiple solutions to climate change, all they need funding. For example, funding electric cars and public transportationcan lead to less pollution from cars.
 

KrellRell

Member
How is voting for politicians that believe in climate not action?

Sure, it's action, no argument from me. But do you think a politician is going to fix the world? I think the general population has a better chance at getting things done. lol
 

Kthulhu

Member
Sure, it's action, no argument from me. But do you think a politician is going to fix the world? I think the general population has a better chance at getting things done. lol

You have too much faith in the uneducated masses.

Speak for yourself, I live in Canada. Although, as you will see the transition to renewables comes at a cost.

Is that cost greater than not existing?
 

sasliquid

Member
Serious question:
If the fossil fuel industry "disappears" as they say... How does the world work?
Or are we spelling the death of our current lives?

No fossil fuels mean many of the conveniences we take for granted (like plastics for cell phones and computers) disappear too...

No easy way to get across town without gasoline in the car... I guess we're walking to work?

I'm not being a climate change denier, I'm simply asking how everyone expects the population at large to react with government enforced eradication of how they've lived their lives for the entirety of my lifetime...

Not true. We could transition to a low carbon economy by the end of the century and avoid disastrous environmental damage. This could be done through subsidising/national renewables, carbon capture methods, electric vehicles, recycling etc. But you know that would mean taxes or stopping trying to kill each other and people hating those
 

klonere

Banned
Sure, it's action, no argument from me. But do you think a politician is going to fix the world? I think the general population has a better chance at getting things done. lol

This goes beyond individuals. The changes needed are systematic, in business, society and government.

Which means it'll never be solved as the way we are set up right now, those three forces are often very much working against each other.
 

Beartruck

Member
No easy way to get across town without gasoline in the car... I guess we're walking to work?

I'm not being a climate change denier, I'm simply asking how everyone expects the population at large to react with government enforced eradication of how they've lived their lives for the entirety of my lifetime...
You say this like electric vehicles don't already exist.
 
Speak for yourself, I live in Canada. Although, as you will see the transition to renewables comes at a cost.
And Canada does not use coal for its power? Every country does and it needs to change, since those things pollute an awful lot.

What cost are we talking when transitioning to renewable energy production? Energy is energy in the end, no matter if it is made in a nuclear or coal plant.

We will always use oil for other things and it has its uses. But energy production should move on from fossil fuels quickly and it can be done.
 
Serious question:
If the fossil fuel industry "disappears" as they say... How does the world work?
Or are we spelling the death of our current lives?

No fossil fuels mean many of the conveniences we take for granted (like plastics for cell phones and computers) disappear too...

No easy way to get across town without gasoline in the car... I guess we're walking to work?

I'm not being a climate change denier, I'm simply asking how everyone expects the population at large to react with government enforced eradication of how they've lived their lives for the entirety of my lifetime...


The government's not going to enforce this, most of them are paid millions to deny it.

It would take public change, probably starting with a movement that states the way society has been governed is going to lead us to extinction.
 

Izuna

Banned
Is this the atheist version of the biblical end of the world?

We're fucked =(

I was on a coach that transported 8 people on a 6 hour drive at about £7 each. (so pretty much the driver ate all the money with his or her salary). It's not like it makes sense to automatically upgrade us to use the train or something, which is probably only 30% filled.
 

BriGuy

Member
One of a handful of reasons I don't want kids. Between the political climate and the climate climate, I don't think we're giving them a really pleasant world.
 

bachikarn

Member
The prevalence of attitudes like this is why we have no hope of stopping this.

So the prevalence of the attitude that climate change is a big deal and we need to treat is seriously gives us not hope of stopping it?

Sorry, I'm just a little skeptical that an 'extinction event' is going to start in 2035. That doesn't mean I think we should sit and do nothing.
 

ViciousDS

Banned
its going to be too late before they do anything.

Start build an underground house and get a tunnel system going!

We are fucked
 

Lime

Member
So in other words, there's literally no way of stopping this. Good to know.

There is. The technology and knowledge are there. The political will is not (due to a host of factors, such as corporate power, apathy, voter belief in neoliberal and libertarian ideology)

But it needs to happen now.
 
It's disheartening to see this issue so widely ignored by the general populace. We can do something about it, but we won't.

If we don't kill ourselves with nuclear war or constant warfare, this absolutely will. It's only a question of when.
 

sasliquid

Member
So in other words, there's literally no way of stopping this. Good to know.

Nope, thats an even more dangerous framing of the issue.

Every little helps, reducing your own footprint and voting for more environmentally friendly politicians (if more existed) may not stop Climate Change but it could slow it down giving us more time to adapt and realise the error of our ways.

Edit: I don't mean to pick on you in particular, this view point is present in several other posts
 
I won't be. I'm not going to judge anyone else, having kids is what we do, everyone knows (or assumes) their ability to raise another human being, but my personal perspective is that it would be irresponsible of me. This isn't a decision I've taken lightly or come to recently, but it's one I've found little reason to change as the years pass.

Don't have kids people, their world is going to suck.

One of a handful of reasons I don't want kids. Between the political climate and the climate climate, I don't think we're giving them a really pleasant world.

Yeah, better to let the people in favor of ruining the world have kids and pass on their messed up ideologies to them instead.
 

AYF 001

Member
You want government enforced Mad Max?
No. In the movies, fuel shortage leads to nuclear war, and the survivors fight over the remaining resources. There won't be any government to enforce anything, especially when people realize it's too late and see what the politicians helped get us into.
 

KrellRell

Member
And Canada does not use coal for its power? Every country does and it needs to change, since those things pollute an awful lot.

What cost are we talking when transitioning to renewable energy production? Energy is energy in the end, no matter if it is made in a nuclear or coal plant.

We will always use oil for other things and it has its uses. But energy production should move on from fossil fuels quickly and it can be done.

I guess I was speaking to Ontario specifically, no coal. I believe there is a bit of coal in a few provinces.

We are talking real cash cost. No one wants to see their taxes rise, or their electricity bills. In Ontario, our electricity costs have doubled over the past few years, to the highest in the country. Many people are not able to afford their bills.

I totally agree we need to move to renewables, I don't think nuclear should be overlooked.
 
So the prevalence of the attitude that climate change is a big deal and we need to treat is seriously gives us not hope of stopping it?

Sorry, I'm just a little skeptical that an 'extinction event' is going to start in 2035. That doesn't mean I think we should sit and do nothing.

It is a big deal. It's most likely will not start in 2035 but it will get progressively worse each year. British Columbia, Canada is breaking new climate records every year. Snowfall has gone down drastically for the BC southern coast, drought measures are becoming more common, our forests are becoming increasingly susceptible to the pine beetle (which usually dies off in winter) but doesn't anymore--it's why you see leagues and leagues of brown trees. You're just being a crazy person at this point.
 

KrellRell

Member
Such as? What specifically are you talking about?

Money. Electricity rates rise, taxes rise. I'm not against it, but it's hard to control and a lot that money gets completely wasted while people struggle to pay their bills. Plus, you shift jobs from on industry to another, so you have to deal with the layoffs and what not. It's not as black and white as most people like to believe. It is blatantly obvious that we shouldn't be generating electricity with coal.

As more vehicles become electric, the source of electricity will become more and more important. I can't see how we can sustain this shift without investing in nuclear. Ontario has been preparing for this for some time now, we burn no coal and have been reducing our consumption gradually. I believe this is to allow capacity for electric vehicles, which will be an insane strain on our grid.
 

bachikarn

Member
It is a big deal. It's most likely will not start in 2035 but it will get progressively worse each year. British Columbia, Canada is breaking new climate records every year. Snowfall has gone down drastically for the BC southern coast, drought measures are becoming more common, our forests are becoming increasingly susceptible to the pine beetle (which usually dies off in winter) but doesn't anymore--it's why you see leagues and leagues of brown trees. You're just being a crazy person at this point.

I feel like you are not reading what I am saying at all. I literally said climate change is a big deal.
 

ahoyhoy

Unconfirmed Member
Sure, it's action, no argument from me. But do you think a politician is going to fix the world? I think the general population has a better chance at getting things done. lol

Individual action is the preferable course, but to make a realistic difference we need swift systemic change that can only happen top-down.

Basicslly, we collectively are justspoiled children that need someone to discipline us because we can't help ourselves.

I'm beginning to think the only thing that can save us is some kind of technocratic panel to make decisions on issues like these. Democracy is proving too easy to exploit in a free market system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom