The question of "97%" scientist's climate change concensus.

[Old Koreelah]

...and not so long ago (before we became dependent on fossil fuels) it was nearly 100%

 

 

[kgwilson]

Yes what took 4.2 billion years to accumulate we have managed to use most of since the industrial revolution and at the current rate of consumption all the oil will be gone by 2052, gas by 2060 & coal by 2088. All gone in just 300 years & there are still those who believe all this fossil fuel consumption is not having any effect on the planet. Luckily the majority see and understand the problem, the damage done and the use of renewables is increasing exponentially. Have we reached the point of no return? Perhaps but I won't be around to witness the failure. IMHO the probability of the human race going down the same track as the myriad of extinct species is increasing year on year. What comes after is anyones guess as the sun still has another 5 billion years or so to go before it dies.

 

 

[Cosmick]

Don't worry about saving the Planet, the Planet will be fine. All that's going to happen is nature will get rid of us (by our own hand) and then over time will get things back in balance.

 

 

[Bruce]

Sorry Cosmick, but we will outlive cockroaches, in fact we can PARTY on cockroaches.

 

People will be hard to get rid of for sure. It is what we call civilization which is at risk.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Our ability to adapt our environment to us is predicated on energy and technology. The hotter the planet gets, the more energy we need to adapt our environment to our needs. Now, one could argue that a) as the top of the food/evolutionary change (I know sharks and tigers/lions eat us, but by and large, we are at the top of the chain as we have adapted our environment to protect us somewhat), we are the slowest the evolve as we are the least threatened, so as the environment changes, we plod along in the knowledge that we can switch on an air conditioner, drive about a bit and combined with the ever-growing over-population of earth with us, the damage being done starts becoming exponential.

 

Then as the damage starts resulting in food shortages due to poisoning the land/water through pollution or extreme weather events wiping out crops and starving/drowning livestock; and commodities become more expensive as it becomes that much hard to extract them from their sources, people start thinking they are going to have to betray some of their civilised ideals to maintain a standard of living. There will ultimately be some bloodshed as a well-armed but hungry nation is a dangerous one. There will be a reduction in the stocks of population, however, it won't be enough to stop the onslaught of the chain reaction of damage to the environment. Those methane munching microbes are saturated with gas and can't regenerate quickly enough - in fact you can hear the pops as they explode; the greenhouse gases act as a comfy doona (duvet for our UK brethren). Food and other materials shortages start to really bite and humanity moves from inter-country wars to civil war and riot.

 

Oceans warm and stop the gulfstream; food becomes even more scarce and the oceans start housing a blanket of algae which let off more greenhouse gases and asphyxiates the earth. At this stage, we have eaten all the insects, reptiles and processed excrement and await a slow, painful death of hunger, asphyxiation, exposure and wind burn (thanks to the increase in strength of geostrophic winds because of greater pressure differentials of uneven warming)...

 

Everything dies except for the algae and somehow the earths magnetic field has remained and what is left of the atmosphere clings to earth via a gravitational pull (for the sake of this, I am not taking into account the earth wobbling off its rotational axis) The algae becomes the foundation of all evolutionary life on earth... and 4.9bn years later, humans re-appear... just in time for the big candle in the sky to blow out. Game over.

 

Of course, there is little, if any scientific foundation that backs up this story, but it's a compelling thought...

 

 

[Marty_d]

Interesting post Jerry... and not a comforting one to take to bed!

 

However, consider that the last time Homo Sapiens evolved, we went from being just another ape, to talking bullsh*t on the internet, within 6 million years. In relation to 4.9 billion years, that's an eyeblink. Of course, we took 3.8 billion years to make it this far since the first organisms on the planet, but there's still a huge buffer there.

 

If things go as you posit, and we have to pull ourselves up from algae within the next 4.9 billion years, then we (or intelligent reptiles, or even a species of octopus) could possibly, with the obvious threat of total obliteration from an exploding sun hanging over us, actually work together to leave Earth and plot a course to other stars.

 

Of course, intelligence may never rise again on Earth and future algae will be fried without even knowing about it. In that case, I take comfort in the fact that there are countless billions of stars in this universe, a high number of which have at least one orbiting planet, many of these being in the Goldilocks zone with liquid water, complex molecules and hot smokers - so the chances of life in other solar systems is, in my opinion, pretty damn good.

 

In fact, maybe one day 5 billion years hence, our valiant cephalopod descendants will land on some of these planets, conquer the emerging native species and start transforming the local ecology to better suit their needs. Not like we don't have form...

 

 

[nomadpete]

Jerry, did you grow up on a diet of science fiction too? Sounds like a plot from Arthur Clark or Asimov.......

 

Or maybe just a glimpse through a chink in the space-time continuum.

 

(Can you believe autocorrect keeps changing "chink" to "China"?.....well it is a Chinese mobile phone) :-)

 

 

[Bruce]

We don't have another few billion years. The zone of comfort is moving away from the sun and there is "only" 50 million years left at most. This is just the normal course of events for a star like our sun.

 

In fact the sun is hotter now than during the last CO2 maxima so there is more chance of runaway greenhouse than ever before. In the last CO2 maximum, life retreated to the poles.

 

50 million years is not enough for tectonic movement to reset the geology of the planet to enable primitive people to rediscover metals. That requires ore deposits of copper so rich that campfires sometimes have congealed copper in their ashes. This copper could be hammered into shapes.

 

 

[nomadpete]

So, you all agree. We're fxxxed?

 

Sometime later.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Jerry, did you grow up on a diet of science fiction too? Sounds like a plot from Arthur Clark or Asimov.......

 

 

Or maybe just a glimpse through a chink in the space-time continuum.

Er... have only read two - maybe three novels in my whole life and Sci-Fi is not in that extensive repertoire.. Have watched Back to the Future many times though - so I will subscribe to the latter ;-)

 

(Can you believe autocorrect keeps changing "chink" to "China"?.....well it is a Chinese mobile phone) :-)

Made me larf - I have a cheapo-Chinese phone too so tried it and it does the same!

 

 

[nomadpete]

In my youth I devoured just about all the original science fiction short stories/ novels/essays. They were all the rage at the time and many were thought provoking. They were vehicles for presenting alternative views on reality, society, or future..

 

Some were so very advanced in their thought, that they prophesied the imagined future inventions.. when Arthur Clark (himself a qualified scientist) was interviewed late in life, the interviewer mentioned a few of his predictions that hadn't materialised, he just said "Not yet"'. He did predict satellite communications before the first space rocket. And other things.

 

 

[Marty_d]

(Can you believe autocorrect keeps changing "chink" to "China"?.....well it is a Chinese mobile phone) :-)

Well, I don't think they like being called "Chinks". It's just trying to gently lead you away from racist name-calling...

 

 

[nomadpete]

Marty, now I gotta try all those other words that could be possibly considered "racist". Just to see if my Chinese phone has it's own racist slant (am I allowed to use that word?)

 

If my phone gently leads me away from other naughty words, I'll believe you.

 

Anyway, why must we assume that the word "chink" would only be used in a disparaging way? I'm heartily sick and tired of thought police assuming that any word which might be taken more than one way, is going to be used in the most hurtful way!

 

I wasn't using the word "chink" to refer to any person. If I was, surely the autocorrect should have changed it to "Chinese"

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Whoa, steady on ol' chap... the wink at the end of Marty's post indicated a little tongue-in-cheek. However, my phone is definitely racist.. Corrects chink to China, but doesn't auto correct Skip to Australian... Bl@@dy thing!

 

 

[pmccarthy]

What does your phone do to a chink in the curtain, or a nip in the air? Does it allow coon cheese?

 

 

[Marty_d]

Marty, now I gotta try all those other words that could be possibly considered "racist". Just to see if my Chinese phone has it's own racist slant (am I allowed to use that word?)

If my phone gently leads me away from other naughty words, I'll believe you.

 

Anyway, why must we assume that the word "chink" would only be used in a disparaging way? I'm heartily sick and tired of thought police assuming that any word which might be taken more than one way, is going to be used in the most hurtful way!

 

I wasn't using the word "chink" to refer to any person. If I was, surely the autocorrect should have changed it to "Chinese"

Sorry Peter... my sense of humour... 'twas definitely meant tongue-in-chink... er, cheek.

 

 

[storchy neil]

Red picked that one up weeks ago oils ain't oils sol Neil

 

 

[Bruce]

Since the only use of those warships is to create employment, surely the more faults they have then the better they perform at their use?

 

 

[Marty_d]

Is that like the Adani coal mine which they think will create "thousands of jobs"? Heard Matt Canavan (who sounds like a complete dick) saying that over the life of "60 years" the mine will pay 6 billion in royalties. But to even start they want a billion dollar loan to build a railway (which only they will use) plus a $300+ million "royalty holiday" for probably 3 years. Another billion.

 

We've got the federal government, state government and local mayors lining up to kiss Adani's ar*se. Not a very good bargaining position.

 

Meanwhile, no bank in Australia, and possibly the world, will fund the project. More and more countries are shutting down coal fired power stations. Where the hell are they going to be selling coal in 60 years??

 

Even for the tossers who don't believe climate change is real, the financials just don't stack up.

 

 

[Yenn]

Adani is absolutely crucial for the Qld economy. The premier has told us so. What she hasn't told us is how much Qld will benefit by. Forgetting the Royalties fiasco, we could hope to get income tax from the employees. The Qld government would get the kudos of providing jobs for Queenslanders. That is if any Queenslanders are employed. my bet is that it will be a highly automated mine, with only a few jobs. Possibly the dump trucks and excavators will be driven by Indians in India, by remote control. Don't laugh, the Yanks fight in Afghanistan with drones piloted in the USA. Adani will not make any money in Australia, so no company tax will be paid. The cost per tonne of coal will be $XX and that will be exactly what the Australian part of the organisation will remit to India.

 

As far as I can see the whole shemozzle just shows how effective our government is. We would be better off without any of them.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch... Alternative energy became renewables, and is rapidly becoming mainstream.

 

Scientists are calling this a "Kodak moment" for Australia.

 

Adani mine 'a financial house of cards' as coal meets its Kodak moment

 

"Australia can meet its 2030 greenhouse emissions target at zero net cost, according to our analysis of a range of options for the National Electricity Market."

 

The Net Cost Of Using Renewables To Hit Australia's Climate Target: Nothing

 

 

[spacesailor]

A Kiwi acquaintance built a "watermill generator" to power a few Pumps that moved water from the valley up to their house.(in UpperHutt first or second house before the Rimatakas )

 

They copped a huge fine for not connecting to the grid system, then the government agents inspected their hose and gave another fine for not having an enclose toilet / bathroom.

 

So to all the tinckerants, (like me) who come up with some "out of the square" moments.

 

Your under the thumb of the Bureaucrats!. So keep your inventions under wraps, lest they find out.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Really? So, if I hook up a solar battery charger to charge my batteries, am I also subject to a fine? Seems an odd one. And why does the presence of a hose require a toilet/bathroom (I am assumig it is the hose that contained the said pumped water and not something he peed down while maintaining it all)?

 

Seems very odd...

 

 

[Bruce]

Jerry, I'm sure he meant house not hose.

 

And I agree with space about nasty inspectors invading your property to bully you.

 

I just hate how property rights have lost out to bullying bureaucrats.

 

There was this hitherto law-abiding septuagenarian farmer in NSW who actually killed such an inspector. Yes the farmer later died in jail but he did achieve some reforms in the way the bureaucracy conducts its home invasions.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

LOL.. Now that I read it, house does make sense.. couldn't work out how they would be worried about a hose..

 

I can't believe it is a legal requirement to hook up a generator to the grid though. Here, at least on smallholdings, you are encouraged to go off grid (which, if we don't sell the property, I will look at doing so) - no need to hook the output up to the grid.

 

Agree - bullying bureaucrats need to justify their salaries... Disgusting -especially as NZ always seems that little more pragmatic than Aus.