Many of the county and state officials along the FL coast know climate change is happening. They just don't talk about it because in Florida they pretend like if you don't mention something it doesn't exist. https://grist.org/climate-energy/florida-officials-banned-from-talking-about-climate-change/ It's the same here in the upper Midwest. Most farmers know that things are changing and not for the better. Minnesota like many states is getting wetter and more frequent and irregular rains make it harder to plant and harvest. At the same time I've heard many hunters and fishermen note how they are seeing different animals and different plants now growing in Northern Minnesota. Even in the some 20 years I've lived in MN it's noticeable that things are changing. Northern MN is firmly red and Trump country but even there they know things are changing even if they don't want to call it Climate Change.
here is a map of Florida's coastline approx 20k years ago, anthropogenic climate change is accelerating a natural process that has been going on for a long time
Not exactly. Human civilization has arose during a relatively warm period of the Earth already there is plenty of evidence that the Earth should be heading towards a cooling period. Human caused climate change appears to not only be blunting that but causing the Earth to warm up much faster than expected. Also note in most cases warming and cooling shifts happen over a very long period of time, thousands of years. In the cases of fast climate change that almost always means a mass extinction event.
You're pulling out a map from the last ice age. The science suggests we were entering another ice age until we reversed that trend through human efforts. CO2 levels are near 420 ppm. In the last million years, it never crossed 300 ppm. We're going to warm to a level unseen in the past million years - how can that be natural? Do you really believe this narrative Os? You're too smart, tell me you are playing devil's advocate here.
we are currently in an interglacial. I don't think anyone disputes that https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/how-long-can-we-expect-present-interglacial-period-last I've posted the link to Behringer's book before:
Earth can be in an interglacial period with temperatures on the decline just like you can be in a glacial period with the temperature rising.
That took 20k. We are now talking about that level of change in 100s of years. With billion living on the coast, the impact will be devastating. Here is the link to the source of that pic you posted for full context: Exploring the Submerged New World 2012: Background: Sea Level Rise: NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research Here is a link to what the coastline looks like for fts of sea level rise. By 2100, it could be 1ft or up to 8ft higher depending on greenhouse gas pathway. All links are from NOAA.
All these unexpected cold fronts we've had over the last 5-10 years come from the north. For the yokels out there who think that coldness is not warming or "climate change "... you will miss those cold fronts when the ice caps melt to 20% of its original size.
and here's the shoreline of Florida approx 125k years ago the point being that shorelines are not fixed entities in time but rather shift and move over time. This second map shows the high ground to which Miami's climate refugees will have to retreat if and when the time comes. The good news is that such a population shift will occur over a very long period of time, decades- or even centuries-long. Unlike forced rapid dislocations of large populations (e.g., the Ukraine war has seen something like 1.5 million people move over a month and half), the social response to rising sea level and vanishing coastal shorelines is likely to be planned, orderly, and in all likelihood government-subsidized. War is devastating; climate change is unlikely to be devastating. I've previously described how such a government-subsidized relocation would work in a place like Bangladesh, which has significantly less in the way of resources than a place like Miami https://bbs.clutchfans.net/threads/...han-conservatives.295954/page-3#post-12205589
Right, it moves. That's not in dispute. My point wasn't about it doesn't move but how fast it moves. I read that post. It is too focused and discounts other impacts. Coastal flooding is one aspect of climate change. Even with that, the standard of living is different for different regions - taking just a low standard of living as an example is not representative of the globe and especially in richer countries. Things that it discounts include migration (which also includes places that are no longer suitable for living due to extreme heat) to where and the impact of that, foods source instability/famine, wars over limited resources, costs of extreme weather, and so on. Whatever the cost of mitigations, economists are now stating the cost of inaction is more than the cost of actions. That's just in financial terms that don't consider the cost to human lives and the cost of wars that military planners have already stated.
Deloitte Report: Inaction on Climate Change Could Cost the US Economy $14.5 Trillion by 2070 – Press release | Deloitte US NEW YORK, Jan. 25, 2022 — A new report released today from the Deloitte Economics Institute shows that the United States economy could gain $3 trillion if it rapidly decarbonizes over the next 50 years. This once-in-a-generation transformation could add nearly 1 million more jobs to the US economy by 2070, according to the report, “The Turning Point: A new economic climate in the United States.” “The Deloitte Economic Institute Turning Point report makes the case for another industrial revolution in the U.S.—one built on low-emissions growth—to avoid significant losses from the climate crisis and to create a more dynamic, prosperous economy for the U.S.,” said Alicia Rose, Deputy CEO for Deloitte US. “The analysis shows that the battle to slow climate change is not only an aspirational goal, but an economic imperative for the U.S.” If global warming reaches around 3°C toward the century’s end, Deloitte’s analysis indicates that economic damages would grow and compound, affecting every industry and region in the country. This would make it harder for people to live and work due to heat stress, rising sea levels, damaged infrastructure and reduced agricultural productivity. Deloitte’s analysis shows that insufficient action on climate change could cost the U.S. economy $14.5 trillion in the next 50 years. A loss of this scale is equivalent to nearly 4% of GDP or $1.5 trillion in 2070 alone. And over the next 50 years, nearly 900,000 jobs could disappear each year due to climate damage. “If the U.S. chooses to adopt an ambitious, holistic path towards decarbonization it could see net economic gains by 2048,” said Scott Corwin, Managing Director in Deloitte US’s ESG Strategic Growth Offering. “Every region of the country would benefit economically.” Transitioning to a low-emissions economy would require the U.S. to accelerate investments in clean energy systems and a new mix of technologies that span across industries. New jobs would be created by the rapid expansion of manufacturing and private sector services. Other jobs—and entirely new kinds of work—would be created by expansion in clean energy sectors such as renewable energy and green hydrogen. And, according Deloitte’s research, the regions hardest hit by unchecked climate change would have the most to gain. “The analysis demonstrates that we have a narrow window of time—the next decade—to make the bold decisions needed to change our climate trajectory and reach a turning point,” added Rose. “The decisions made by governments, businesses and communities would reinforce our early progress and could unlock extraordinary economic possibilities for the U.S.” The report sets out a scenario with four key stages for the U.S. climate transition: Between now and 2025, the public and private sectors make bold decisions to rapidly transition to renewable energy. This involves transforming the electricity value chain, such as storage and transmission, that enables parallel and synchronized advances in the mobility, industrial and food systems. From 2026 to 2040, the acceleration to net-zero creates major economic shifts in policy, energy systems, investment priorities and consumer behavior. From 2041 to 2050—which is the turning point where the benefits of transition outweigh the costs—decarbonization of high-emission industries is almost complete. The costs of sustainable technologies decrease, and wider net economic gains are realized. In 2050 and beyond, the U.S. economy is radically transformed and is more globally competitive in core industries. The economy achieves net-zero emissions, operating in a world that keeps global warming to below 2°C. The U.S. has the technology, capital, infrastructure and skilled labor needed to make this transition possible and at the least cost. As governments and industries invest in low-emissions growth, the U.S. economy could experience extraordinary gains in a single generation. This study is part of a series of Deloitte reports that examine the economic impact of climate change in regions including Europe and Asia Pacific. Visit Deloitte’s Climate and Sustainability practice to learn more.
I knew Manichin had coal industry ties but the fact that he's a literal coal baron makes me just lol at this point to keep from crying
None of this matters to Oil Barrons and Oil Simps because they think the trillions locked in proven reserves are worth more than enough justification to rape the earth until the soil bleeds dry. At that point, they're rich enough to cut and run to "safe havens" we take for granted today. Or maybe things will be so wrecked, they'll buy a ticket to Mars while the Simps cheer on "Free Markets" while simultaneously b**** about the government not doing anything about gas prices.
The warming trend you have spoken off isn't there anymore: We were actually entering a cooling trend and heading towards another ice age until manmade climate change reversed that and put us on a far greater warming trend. Florida may have been mostly under water 150k years ago, but no one was living in Miami back then either. Yes sea levels will rise and fall, but not at a rate we are seeing now. It's one thing to have to adjust in 20 years versus 20,000 years.
This article points to opponents of renewable energy knowingly using misinformation to oppose projects in their area. The idea that it is acceptable now or have to compromise with misinformation is one of the biggest problems of society and not just on this issue. Posting selected text more at link. https://www.mprnews.org/amp/story/2...gy-solar-energy-climate-change-misinformation Misinformation is derailing renewable energy projects across the United States "From the beginning, Kitson — who teaches physics and chemistry at the local high school — knew he didn't want the turbines anywhere near him. He had heard from folks who lived near another wind project about 10 miles away that the turbines were noisy and that they couldn't sleep. "There were so many people saying that it's horrible, you do not want to live under these things,'" Kitson says. ... Kitson, the administrator of the Facebook page, says he knows that these accidents aren't typical. "Those events are not likely. We know that," Kitson says. But Kitson has seen a broken piece of a fallen turbine blade himself, which got him worrying about how the fiberglass might affect the integrity of the soil and the crops. So he posts the photos and articles, many of which he receives from an anti-wind email list. "I do that just to try to show people what's possible." ... But Ben Hoen, a researcher at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, says his more than 15 years of research has shown that wind turbines have little to no impact on nearby property values. Hoen says, "We have not found evidence of property value impacts despite studying it over multiple periods of time." Hoen does say that studies in the Netherlands and United Kingdom have found some effects on property values, but they were far smaller than Kitson's reference to studies showing a 20 percent-40 percent depreciation. ... Other misleading ideas about renewable energy come from groups with ties to the fossil fuel industry, like the Texas Public Policy Foundation. The foundation recently released a film trailer for an anti-offshore wind group in Massachusetts that features multiple falsehoods, including the untrue statement that the proposed project didn't do any environmental impact assessments and the incorrect idea that offshore wind projects "haven't worked anywhere in the world." The Texas Public Policy Foundation did not respond to a request for comment. ... Anti-renewable groups have internal disputes over use of misinformation Barbara Kerr is a professor of psychology at the University of Kansas and she's a founding member of that anti-solar group in Kansas, which opposes NextEra Energy's proposed utility-scale solar plant in Douglas and Johnson counties. Kerr says she knows the videos that have been featured by the group she co-founded have misinformation. "Just horrible," Kerr says of the videos. "They are just counterfactual and not something we should have on the website." But despite Kerr's objections, her group decided in January to keep the videos online. "It is important to not judge, and censor utility-scale solar content/opinions contributed by citizens. If we become judge and jury, we are headed down the wrong path," the group said in an emailed statement." Kerr says that while she disagrees with the misinformation used by some in her group, she says the anti-solar coalition makes for "strange bedfellows." "Sometimes you have to compromise," she says. "I don't want to alienate these people. They go to the meetings in Douglas County and Johnson County."
Antarctic ice shelves are shattering. How fast will seas rise? (nationalgeographic.com) An unexpected ice shelf collapse in East Antarctica, after temperatures spiked 70°F above normal, highlights bigger problems in the West, where one glacier could singlehandedly raise global sea levels several feet. BY ALEJANDRA BORUNDA PUBLISHED MARCH 28, 2022 • 13 MIN READ
meant to comment on this earlier but forgot. Sea level rise for the past twenty years is estimated to be 3.7 mm per year, and for the next twenty years projected to continue at 3.7 mm/yr. That's 74 mm of rise in twenty years, or 2.9 inches. That's 2.9 inches over the past twenty years; that is also 2.9 more inches of sea level rise over the next twenty years. I think we survived the last twenty years of sea level rise. I believe we will survive the next twenty years of sea level rise.
