Years of Living Dangerously

[Jonger]

The thing that gets me is that it's already assured baring a massive natural or technological intervention the entire GIS ice cap, all land ice and eventually most of or all of Antarctica is going to melt at the rate we are going now.

 

 

If it's 100, 500, 1000, 5000 years how is that ok?

 

 

The arctic is expected to warm 6-9C by 2100.

 

GIS could easily be losing 5000-10000KM3 a year by then.

 

How can we pretend that is ok?

 

You say this as if its some quick fix to change the course. Fossil fuels got us to the point we are at now, so the fact we are typing this on a oil derived keyboard, powered by fossil fuel power plants, makes the whole issue seem pretty understandable.

 

We both want the same thing, human civilization to prosper and advance into the future. We are the only sentient beings on this earth and maybe within 10 light years, that's an amazing thing to preserve.

 

Honestly, I think this is just a blip in time, like the iron age or bronze age, we need to advance from fossil fuels, but complaining about it non stop is pretty silly. The cities have been where they are on the coasts for about .5% of human existence, if they need to be moved, so be it.

 

50 years, the fossil fuel era will be over.

[AvantHiatus]

Now is the time to act if you want to avoid theorized AGW futures. This is not a distant down the road problem, even if the effects are lagged. Tired of hearing this over and over again, its very disrespectful.

 

Whatever happens will be our fault, this is our legacy. Geoengineering will not save us from being responsible, we need to take carbon directly out of atmosphere and populate the whole surface of the land with trees and the ocean with plankton/algae. This requires massive innovation, and we are not doing this.

 

We also need to deliver proper justice to third-world nations and stop China/India from following in our footsteps or our legacy will be forever tarnished and confined to the darkest depths of humanity, in the same realm as Hitler and Stalin. We would have opted out for infinite consumption and growth, like an invasive species that kills everything around it.

 

 

 

50 years, the fossil fuel era will be over.

 

The damage will already be complete or started irrecoverably before that occurs and CO2 levels will remain above 400ppm for the next 100,000 years if they trigger feedback systems. We need it to be over in the next 10-20 years. Meaning zero emissions from all countries. If not, we will have to adapt to a harsh environment and wait for CO2 to drop naturally or scrub it from the atmosphere with radical technologies.

 

It's mostly a value judgement and a morality issue, something that nobody cares about anymore.

[Jonger]

Now is the time to act if you want to avoid theorized AGW futures. This is not a distant down the road problem, even if the effects are lagged. Tired of hearing this over and over again, its very disrespectful.

 

Whatever happens will be our fault, this is our legacy. Geoengineering will not save us from being responsible, we need to take carbon directly out of atmosphere and populate the whole surface of the land with trees and the ocean with plankton/algae. This requires massive innovation, and we are not doing this.

 

We also need to deliver proper justice to third-world nations and stop China/India from following in our footsteps or our legacy will be forever tarnished and confined to the darkest depths of humanity, in the same realm as Hitler and Stalin. We would have opted out for infinite consumption and growth, like an invasive species that kills everything around it.

 

 

The damage will already be complete or started irrecoverably before that occurs and CO2 levels will remain above 400ppm for the next 100,000 years if they trigger feedback systems. We need it to be over in the next 10-20 years. Meaning zero emissions from all countries. If not, we will have to adapt to a harsh environment and wait for CO2 to drop naturally or scrub it from the atmosphere with radical technologies.

 

It's mostly a value judgement and a morality issue, something that nobody cares about anymore.

 

May I ask how old you are? 

 

I hope you don't need to be reminded of what we are passing down to future generations. Do or don't you agree that almost 99% of human suffering, war, slavery and misery ended because of fossil fuels or not? 

 

I'm guessing you are 22 years old. How close was I?

[JC-CT]

May I ask how old you are?

I hope you don't need to be reminded of what we are passing down to future generations. Do or don't you agree that almost 99% of human suffering, war, slavery and misery ended because of fossil fuels or not?

I'm guessing you are 22 years old. How close was I?

Woah there, 99% (or any %) of war was ended because of fossil fuels? That's quite a stretch IMO.

[AvantHiatus]

May I ask how old you are? 

 

I hope you don't need to be reminded of what we are passing down to future generations. Do or don't you agree that almost 99% of human suffering, war, slavery and misery ended because of fossil fuels or not? 

 

I'm guessing you are 22 years old. How close was I?

Young enough to not be a dinosaur and old enough to not be ignorant.

 

I disagree, fossil fuels have powered human population overshoot. Without, there would not be hordes of people waiting to be destroyed by the emerging AGW world.

 

Are you arguing that slavery was illegalized because fossil fuels eliminated the economic demand for it? 

[The_Global_Warmer]

You say this as if its some quick fix to change the course. Fossil fuels got us to the point we are at now, so the fact we are typing this on a oil derived keyboard, powered by fossil fuel power plants, makes the whole issue seem pretty understandable.

 

We both want the same thing, human civilization to prosper and advance into the future. We are the only sentient beings on this earth and maybe within 10 light years, that's an amazing thing to preserve.

 

Honestly, I think this is just a blip in time, like the iron age or bronze age, we need to advance from fossil fuels, but complaining about it non stop is pretty silly. The cities have been where they are on the coasts for about .5% of human existence, if they need to be moved, so be it.

 

50 years, the fossil fuel era will be over.

 

 

That is absurd.

 

 

If the Earth warms 2-3C+ globally by 2100-2150 tens of millions will die directly from it.  Maybe hundreds of millions.

 

How are we supposed to get the ice to come back when the arctic is 10C warmer overall and methane is pouring out of the permafrost and arctic basin.

 

There will be no ice over the pole for at least a couple months by then.  The methane clathrates will melt easy.  We are talking periods of 10C water temps over the Laptev and ESB reaching the ocean floor there where its 30M deep or less.

 

 

All of that Methane will become co2. 

 

The oceans being dramatically warmer with release far more co2.

 

 

How are we going to stop that while feeding 9-10 million people.

 

How do we relocate a billion people or more?

 

What do we do if the coral reefs all get destroyed.

 

How do we preserve and build this technology that you seem to hold more important than life it self while relocating hundreds of millions and feeding 10 billion?

 

How do we expand this technology, electricity, and modern living to all 10 billion when we are moving those people.

 

with all of the land ice melted how do we get fresh water to 2-3 billion+ people in tropical regions that rely on it?

 

What about fresh water with nearly all the land ice over Canada gone?

 

What do we do if the methane blows out and the Earth warms another 1.5c on top of the 2-3C already?

 

what if large chunks of Antarctica slide into the ocean causing major abrupt SLR change that displaces millions of folks at once?

[Jonger]

Woah there, 99% (or any %) of war was ended because of fossil fuels? That's quite a stretch IMO.

 

And you will find that most of the worlds wars are in places we commonly laugh about being technologically impaired. 

 

The middle east and Africa come to mind. Facebook is trying to fly drones overhead to get the internet into undeveloped parts of the world to start modernizing and eliminating problems we take for granted.

 

You can b!tch and moan all day long about FFs, but don't go talking about passing down only problems.

[Jonger]

That is absurd.

 

 

If the Earth warms 2-3C+ globally by 2100-2150 tens of millions will die directly from it.  Maybe hundreds of millions.

 

How are we supposed to get the ice to come back when the arctic is 10C warmer overall and methane is pouring out of the permafrost and arctic basin.

 

There will be no ice over the pole for at least a couple months by then.  The methane clathrates will melt easy.  We are talking periods of 10C water temps over the Laptev and ESB reaching the ocean floor there where its 30M deep or less.

 

 

All of that Methane will become co2. 

 

The oceans being dramatically warmer with release far more co2.

 

 

How are we going to stop that while feeding 9-10 million people.

 

How do we relocate a billion people or more?

 

What do we do if the coral reefs all get destroyed.

 

How do we preserve and build this technology that you seem to hold more important than life it self while relocating hundreds of millions and feeding 10 billion?

 

How do we expand this technology, electricity, and modern living to all 10 billion when we are moving those people.

 

with all of the land ice melted how do we get fresh water to 2-3 billion+ people in tropical regions that rely on it?

 

What about fresh water with nearly all the land ice over Canada gone?

 

What do we do if the methane blows out and the Earth warms another 1.5c on top of the 2-3C already?

 

what if large chunks of Antarctica slide into the ocean causing major abrupt SLR change that displaces millions of folks at once?

 

What if an asteroid hits the planet....

 

Is this the Fargo/Phoenix scenario we are discussing here?

[Jonger]

Young enough to not be a dinosaur and old enough to not be ignorant.

 

I disagree, fossil fuels have powered human population overshoot. Without, there would not be hordes of people waiting to be destroyed by the emerging AGW world.

 

Are you arguing that slavery was illegalized because fossil fuels eliminated the economic demand for it? 

 

Slavery was legal for 99.9% of human history... You really don't see the connection to fossil fuels and the fact EVERYTHING on earth has changed over the past 150 years? Just coincidence.

 

Meanwhile, we debate fractions of a degree in 2014.

[JC-CT]

And you will find that most of the worlds wars are in places we commonly laugh about being technologically impaired.

The middle east and Africa come to mind. Facebook is trying to fly drones overhead to get the internet into undeveloped parts of the world to start modernizing and eliminating problems we take for granted.

You can b!tch and moan all day long about FFs, but don't go talking about passing down only problems.

World War II, World War I, even the US Civil War (coal) were all heavily supported by fossil fuels. The decline in warfare between the world's most powerful states since WWII can be directly attributed to an noncarbon-based alternative fuel source - nuclear energy.

[Jonger]

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were flattened with an A-Bomb... 15 years later the city was completely rebuilt.

 

We are talking extremes right?

 

As for tropical and african sustainability? 

 

They aren't sustainable now, that's why we have a non stop aid flow going to those places now.

[Jonger]

World War II, World War I, even the US Civil War (coal) were all heavily supported by fossil fuels. The decline in warfare between the world's most powerful states since WWII can be directly attributed to an noncarbon-based alternative fuel source - nuclear energy.

 

Technology always moves faster than policy.

 

The world shrank and political modernization took place.

 

I'm not argueing what powered the war machine, just the structure of the world is more stable with medicine, energy and food. Fossil fuels have allowed us to evolve medicine, supply energy and harvest food for the masses.... Slavery is gone because of it. 

 

The world was a disease filled, life shortened, slavery infested sh!thole prior to modern energy.

 

Ruled by monarchies, since nobody had the communication or could afford the risk to change what was instilled.

[AvantHiatus]

World War II, World War I, even the US Civil War (coal) were all heavily supported by fossil fuels. The decline in warfare between the world's most powerful states since WWII can be directly attributed to an noncarbon-based alternative fuel source - nuclear energy.

May I interject, nuclear power is also destructive but the fear of nuclear war prevented all major wars that would of otherwise happened.

[AvantHiatus]

Technology always moves faster than policy.

 

The world shrank and political modernization took place.

 

I'm not argueing what powered the war machine, just the structure of the world is more stable with medicine, energy and food. Fossil fuels have allowed us to evolve medicine, supply energy and harvest food for the masses.... Slavery is gone because of it. 

 

The world was a disease filled, life shortened, slavery infested sh!thole prior to modern energy.

 

Ruled by monarchies, since nobody had the communication or could afford the risk to change what was instilled.

Right, now it's time to move on and make the next big jump or there will be a dark ages #2. Dat logic...

 

Fossil fuel corporations are the monarchies of our time.

[JC-CT]

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were flattened with an A-Bomb... 15 years later the city was completely rebuilt.

We are talking extremes right?

As for tropical and african sustainability?

They aren't sustainable now, that's why we have a non stop aid flow going to those places now.

I don't know who you are talking to, but I am not talking extremes. You kind of put some extreme words in my mouth, but none came from me.

I simply said that saying war was ended by fossil fuels is absurd and cannot be logically defended.

Never did I say that we aren't passing down anything good to future generations, nor did I say (or think) that nothing good has come from fossil fuels. But by the word good, I mean they have helped the human species thrive. It remains to be seen how long they continue to be good. No extremes, just a great deal of uncertainty on the long-term sustainability of our current society and our ability to adapt to anything and everything we face.

There have been many, many species that didn't make it before us, and many more that won't make it in the future. We aren't immune to the basic truth of existence, which is that it can and will end. The more we, as a species, predict and plan for possible threats, the more likely that we will survive for longer.

[JC-CT]

May I interject, nuclear power is also destructive but the fear of nuclear war prevented all major wars that would of otherwise happened.

Yes, that was the exact point I was making...?

[StudentOfClimatology]

The answer is..yes, we're screwed any way you put it.

- We're already fooking up the climate system.

- We are eventually going to burn through our fossil fuel supply..they will be gone in ~ 100 years. By that time, the Earth will probably be 3-6 degrees hotter, and we'd better have figured out a replacement energy source(s) by then..

- over the next 2000 years, Earth's axial obliquity continues to decline, as our precessional wobble moves past aphelion, leading to reduced insolation at both poles and increased solar forcing at the equator. The expected descent into the next ice age will occur under these conditions, as it always has in the past.

So we're going to experience a "whiplash" of sorts, from intense GHG warming to extreme cooling a few millennia from now.

In other words, enjoy the weather while you still can.

[Jonger]

I really believe if the problem gets bad enough, we will just sequester the co2 into saline aquifers or bio char. In the meanwhile, most developed countries are reducing co2 output even without the threat of immediate climate change.

[The_Global_Warmer]

What if an asteroid hits the planet....

 

Is this the Fargo/Phoenix scenario we are discussing here?

 

 

This pretty much shows your love of snowmobiling, snow and cold in the lakes region is the only reason you come to this forum.

 

You haven't paid any attention to what we discuss here it seems as if it is realistic at all to you.

 

 

The unthawing of the arctic has barely begun.

 

 

So far the warming hasn't been that large versus what is on it's way.  We are talking 7C+ by 2100.  This is tremendous.  The amount of methane coming out of the arctic region compared to now will be dramatically larger.  Like going up per year as much as we have seen the last 20 in all.

 

This doesn't stop with Fossil fuels running out.  It's to late for that.  You keep saying we will burn thru our fossil fuels.

 

 

Last week Co2 levels averaged 401.17.  With the warmer oceans and continued global output growing we are quickly reaching 3PPM per year being dumped into the atmosphere.

 

 

If we average 3ppm for the next 4-5 decades peak levels will be 520-550ppm not including if the ocean belches out or more or can't uptake the amount it has been.  As well as how much methane comes out which turns into Co2 over a few decades.

 

 

If we average 4ppm the next 4-5 decades we peak at 560 to 600ppm.

 

We are guaranteed to hit 500ppm at a bare min.  Most likely 500ppm.  We are also cleaning up our aresols which will actually make global warming worse.

 

 

April to June since 2010 over Russia is mostly 2 to near 4C above the 1951-1980 baseline(GISS).

 

On the 1981-2010 baseline this April is proving to continue that trend quite well.

 

we haven't seen anything yet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[skierinvermont]

Fossil fuels have been a major necessary component to the radical explosion of civilization the last 200 years. But I wouldn't downplay the overall advancement of all technology. Take away any piece of the puzzle, not just fossil fuels, and the explosion would not be possible.

 

And just because of what has been accomplished with fossil fuels doesn't mean it is necessary or good for the future. There's a lot more we could be doing to hasten the end of fossil fuels while maintaining a high standard of living.

[Jonger]

This pretty much shows your love of snowmobiling, snow and cold in the lakes region is the only reason you come to this forum.

You haven't paid any attention to what we discuss here it seems as if it is realistic at all to you.

The unthawing of the arctic has barely begun.

So far the warming hasn't been that large versus what is on it's way. We are talking 7C+ by 2100. This is tremendous. The amount of methane coming out of the arctic region compared to now will be dramatically larger. Like going up per year as much as we have seen the last 20 in all.

This doesn't stop with Fossil fuels running out. It's to late for that. You keep saying we will burn thru our fossil fuels.

Last week Co2 levels averaged 401.17. With the warmer oceans and continued global output growing we are quickly reaching 3PPM per year being dumped into the atmosphere.

If we average 3ppm for the next 4-5 decades peak levels will be 520-550ppm not including if the ocean belches out or more or can't uptake the amount it has been. As well as how much methane comes out which turns into Co2 over a few decades.

If we average 4ppm the next 4-5 decades we peak at 560 to 600ppm.

We are guaranteed to hit 500ppm at a bare min. Most likely 500ppm. We are also cleaning up our aresols which will actually make global warming worse.

April to June since 2010 over Russia is mostly 2 to near 4C above the 1951-1980 baseline(GISS).

On the 1981-2010 baseline this April is proving to continue that trend quite well.

we haven't seen anything yet.

Phoenix/Fargo is code word for ridiculous alarmism gone wild.... Like the entire running gag in this thread. I have been interested in weather and climate for about 20 years and snowmobiled for about 4, so the correlation doesn't quite work. I posted at TWC abd WWBB.

[Msalgado]

May I ask how old you are? 

 

I hope you don't need to be reminded of what we are passing down to future generations. Do or don't you agree that almost 99% of human suffering, war, slavery and misery ended because of fossil fuels or not? 

 

I'm guessing you are 22 years old. How close was I?

 

Well, I should have worn boots because with this comment we're definitely now knee high in bull****.  Not even going to ask you to back this up because this is about as good of an example possible for just pulling something out of your ass that has no basis in reality.

[jburns]

Your lifespan, computer and everything you see and touch in your home only exists because of fossil fuels. 

 

If there were no hydrocarbons in the ground, we would still be in the dark ages, with slavery, plague and constant wars.

 

Fossil fuel utilization is the greatest invention in human history, number 2 on the list is so far back that its not even worth an "also ran" category.

Interesting. Of course it depends on who you ask.  Here's where a survey the Atlantic took had oil drilling.

 

39. Oil drilling, 1859

Fueled the modern economy, established its geopolitics, and changed the climate

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here are the people surveyed.

 

Our Panel of Experts

The scientists, historians, and technologists we consulted to make this list. 

 

Michelle Alexopoulos

Professor of economics, University of Toronto

 

Leslie Berlin 

Historian of business and technology, Stanford; author, The Man Behind the Microchip: Robert Noyce and the Invention of Silicon Valley

 

John Doerr 

General partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers

 

George Dyson

Historian of technology; author, Turing’s Cathedral and Darwin Among the Machines

 

Walter Isaacson 

President and CEO, the Aspen Institute; author, Steve Jobs , Einstein: His Life and Universe, and Benjamin Franklin: An American Life

 

Joi Ito 

Director, MIT Media Lab

 

Alexis Madrigal 

Senior editor, The Atlantic; author, Powering the Dream: The History and Promise of Green Technology

 

Charles C. Mann 

Journalist; author, 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus and 1493: Uncovring the New World Columbus Created

 

Joel Mokyr 

Professor of economics and history, Northwestern University 

 

Linda Sanford 

Senior vice president for enterprise transformation, IBM

 

Astro Teller 

Captain of moonshots, Google[x]; co-founder, Cerebellum Capital and BodyMedia

 

Padmasree Warrior 

Chief technology and strategy officer, Cisco Systems  

 

 

 

And finally, here is the link to the full list.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/11/innovations-list/309536/

[Jonger]

 

Interesting. Of course it depends on who you ask.  Here's where a survey the Atlantic took had oil drilling.

 

39. Oil drilling, 1859

Fueled the modern economy, established its geopolitics, and changed the climate

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here are the people surveyed.

 

Our Panel of Experts

The scientists, historians, and technologists we consulted to make this list. 

 

Michelle Alexopoulos

Professor of economics, University of Toronto

 

Leslie Berlin 

Historian of business and technology, Stanford; author, The Man Behind the Microchip: Robert Noyce and the Invention of Silicon Valley

 

John Doerr 

General partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers

 

George Dyson

Historian of technology; author, Turing’s Cathedral and Darwin Among the Machines

 

Walter Isaacson 

President and CEO, the Aspen Institute; author, Steve Jobs , Einstein: His Life and Universe, and Benjamin Franklin: An American Life

 

Joi Ito 

Director, MIT Media Lab

 

Alexis Madrigal 

Senior editor, The Atlantic; author, Powering the Dream: The History and Promise of Green Technology

 

Charles C. Mann 

Journalist; author, 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus and 1493: Uncovring the New World Columbus Created

 

Joel Mokyr 

Professor of economics and history, Northwestern University 

 

Linda Sanford 

Senior vice president for enterprise transformation, IBM

 

Astro Teller 

Captain of moonshots, Google[x]; co-founder, Cerebellum Capital and BodyMedia

 

Padmasree Warrior 

Chief technology and strategy officer, Cisco Systems  

 

 

 

And finally, here is the link to the full list.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/11/innovations-list/309536/

 

 

Putting the carriage before the horse kind of list.

 

Oil isn't that great, but plastic... Now that's an invention!

[Jonger]

 

No connection.

 

[A-L-E-K]

jonger digging deep into the talking points

[HailMan06]

No connection.

Yes, you are correct in that fossil fuels have been key in raising most people's standard of living.

Unfortunately we as a society cannot remain petroleum based for much longer because of climate change and resource depletion. At some point we will have to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels no matter how beneficial petroleum has been for us in advancing society.

[Msalgado]

 

No connection.

 

 

No one here has said there is no link between quality of life and fossil fuels.  However, you are making claims that simply can't be unsubstantiated and are completely out there.  If you're going to make outlandish claims, you need to do better than simple correlation.  Technology in general has a lot to do with improvement of quality of life and life expectancy but there is a lot of technology outside of fossil fuels.  I don't here you claiming that the bronze age or the wheel are responsible for fossil fuels and therefor responsible for the boom increase in life expectancy.  I wonder why?

[Jonger]

No one here has said there is no link between quality of life and fossil fuels.  However, you are making claims that simply can't be unsubstantiated and are completely out there.  If you're going to make outlandish claims, you need to do better than simple correlation.  Technology in general has a lot to do with improvement of quality of life and life expectancy but there is a lot of technology outside of fossil fuels.  I don't here you claiming that the bronze age or the wheel are responsible for fossil fuels and therefor responsible for the boom increase in life expectancy.  I wonder why?

 

Ideas and inventions that came about pre-1850's were injected with steroids after we began heating with coal and eventually supplying power on a grid. Fossil fuels were a unavoidable part of moving out of the dark ages. I would assume every sentient being in the universe that's as far along or farther along than humans had to utilize their resources to become what they are today. You can't use solar power without first having energy to do the research. 

 

Look, fossil fuels got to go... Its a stepping stone to a much longer future, but some people here act like it was the worst thing to ever come about. 

[Msalgado]

I haven't seen anyone here claim that fossil fules are the worst thing ever.  That's your strawman that you're now tearing down.  Fossil Fuels have been an overall good thing for human society.  That doesn't mean that your statement about them ending 99% of wars, suffering, and whatever else you wanted to include is any closer to being true.