Preparing for An Unfriendly Future (Climate Change, Authoritarianism, etc)

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

We're still a long way from seeing any political measures, but with awareness exploding, I expect actual changes to finally start happening.

 

Doubtful. Big money will fight it tooth and nail. Don't Look Up ages quite well. 

[Rippounet]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Doubtful. Big money will fight it tooth and nail.

Of course. But there are limits to big money's power and we're getting there at warp speed.

Big money's problem is that climate change is happening much faster and hitting developed countries much harder than initially predicted.
Greenwashing works as long as people aren't too scared and can dismiss global warming as someone else's problem (like humanity's poorest half). But once families are actually worried for their elders and infants, politicians and corporations need to up their game a little, at the very least to prevent a minority of radical environmentalists from getting funny ideas and/or suddenly getting very popular.
Another way to put it: it can be easy to pose as the "reasonable guy" when almost all people suffering from climate change are brown and die thousands of kms away (and, quite conveniently, without cameras filming), but it's much much harder when Western Europe is hit hard, rivers and lakes dry up, and farmers are scared for their crops. In that case, governments need to at least pretend to have some kind of plan, and corporations have to be more careful about their callousness not showing.

I hear the UK, Italy, and Spain will tax the recent exceptional profits of fossil fuel companies? There's also been talk of actual regulations lately. It's not much, and big money will remain the main obstacle to the common good for the foreseeable future, but when temperatures go above 40°C people become a wee bit harder to manipulate.
 

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Don't Look Up ages quite well. 

That movie's not even a year old.

It may even prove some sort of turning point: the movie expresses feelings that people will find easy to reference in the next decades, thus helping ridicule deniers.

[JGP]

4 hours ago, Rippounet said:

I assume everyone is aware that Europe is facing a particularly intense heatwave (some articles say it's the worst in 200 years), hitting hard Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, France, and (soon) the UK.

I was looking at a bunch of photos of dried up riverbeds in Italy just the other day. 

[Zorral]

58 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

That movie's not even a year old.

It may even prove some sort of turning point: the movie expresses feelings that people will find easy to reference in the next decades, thus helping ridicule deniers.

Another film that could help in the same manner is Miyazaki's's Princess Mononoke, all the way back from 1997.

[Clueless Northman]

2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Of course. But there are limits to big money's power and we're getting there at warp speed.

Big money's problem is that climate change is happening much faster and hitting developed countries much harder than initially predicted.

You of all people here around should've noticed the most important recent development of political ecology. Bluntly, that the biggest "green" parties in the world just decided climate change wasn't such a biggie after all. I don't care that this came because of Ukraine and Russia, but Greens, specially German Greens, being now ok with relying on shale gas and even coal "to own Putin" is disgusting beyond words. Not to mention the fact they're now fanboying using plenty of military tools that obviously are insane gas guzzlers. This fucking war has probably already more than compensated the feeble gains that we had due to the pandemic and lockdowns; and the lunatic Euro-greens - you know, the guys who were protesting against basing nukes in Western Europe back in the 80s, no matter their hypothetical deterrence against Soviet military - are still cheering for more pollution.

So, yes, obviously, the situation is dire. But when even political parties who actually pretend to care about that turn out not to give a flying fuck, I don't expect anything serious to happen. Not until we literally hang politicians and CEOs from lampposts - and I don't mean it figuratively, mind you. The only thing these scumbags fear is actual physical threats, anything else is beyond their radar because they assume they'll manage to pay their way out of anything on their path.

[LongRider]

2 hours ago, Clueless Northman said:

The only thing these scumbags fear is actual physical threats, anything else is beyond their radar because they assume they'll manage to pay their way out of anything on their path.

Climate change doesn't give a shit about your posh gated community.                

[Derfel Cadarn]

14 hours ago, LongRider said:

Climate change doesn't give a shit about your posh gated community.                

No but they’ll have the money to fuck off to a more pleasant climate for parts of the year.

[Heartofice]

16 hours ago, Clueless Northman said:

 I don't care that this came because of Ukraine and Russia,

But that is quite relevant right?

[Winterfell is Burning]

1 hour ago, Derfel Cadarn said:

No but they’ll have the money to fuck off to a more pleasant climate for parts of the year.

And money for AC, swimming pools, and servants to do the hard work.

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Winterfell is Burning said:

And money for AC, swimming pools, and servants to do the hard work.

Which is why we can't get rid of slavery, as Patrick Henry confessed. Slaves are just so convenient and they make our lives so much more pleasant.

 

[DireWolfSpirit]

I will be adding a pool at some point in the next few years.

The summer heat is reaching even northern Wisconsin quite dramatically and we are in a mini draught, have barely mowed during July due to yellowed grasses.

Area growers are saying they have corn stalks just snapping off at the base and falling in fields in some spots.

Still by and large, I'm slightly optimistic, the region is forecasted to weather climate change better than many other areas, so I do not see myself as needing to be a climate migrant,  which is slightly relieving I suppose.

[ThinkerX]

Probably a bit of an outlier here, but...

...the weather in my portion of Alaska has been 'normal' not just this year, but the last couple of years as well. And this is something I do keep casual track of: it was useful to know what the weather would be like because I'd be out in it. Right now, we've finished with the 'dry' first part of summer and are entering into a week's long period of intermittent rain.

That said, I am only too well aware that of the long-term warming trend in the rest of the state, and I note that portions of the lower 48 (Texas, Arizona, bordering regions) seem to be turning into 'inferno-land.'  And my quasi-relatives on the west coast tell tales of protracted drought.

[Martell Spy]

On 7/16/2022 at 8:37 AM, Tywin et al. said:

Doubtful. Big money will fight it tooth and nail. Don't Look Up ages quite well. 

Definitely true in the U.S. It's recently become official that we will do nothing on climate change for the next few decades. The only question is if the hard right will now go after clean air laws.

I'll correct that. With the exception of private companies. And maybe a few state governments. I'm sure our ExxonMobil overlords will do a fantastic job.

[Kalbear]

Thought this was interesting - use of nuclear power in France is having to be reduced because the rivers are just too hot to cool things down:

Quote

Across the channel, France broke more than 100 all-time heat records across the country in the past week. But just as energy demand is spiking with people desperate to cool off, the high temperatures have forced France to cut down its nuclear power output since the rivers used to cool the power plants have become too hot. Much of Europe is already dealing with a spike in energy prices after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine led countries to reduce their use of Russian oil and gas.

From here:https://www.vox.com/23268566/europe-heat-wave-uk-france-canicule-spain-wildfire-record-temperature-climate

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, KalVsWade said:

use of nuclear power in France is having to be reduced because the rivers are just too hot to cool things down:

I have always thought nuclear as the answer to global warming made no sense, because of this.  But I have been told over and over that the new plants don't need water for cooling. 

[JGP]

Mmn. Then shit like this. 

 

[Rippounet]

1 hour ago, KalVsWade said:

Thought this was interesting - use of nuclear power in France is having to be reduced because the rivers are just too hot to cool things down:

Interestingly enough, that's not quite it, and that article is just wrong (fake news!).
While warmer waters (or lack of water when rivers dry up) are definitely a potential problem down the line, we're not there yet. The reason why nuclear reactors are sometimes turned off during heatwaves is because of environmental regulations, because nuclear plants are not allowed to reject warm water if the river's temperature is already higher than normal.
In fact, three plants have already been granted temporary "exceptions" to keep functioning, for instance the Golfech plant on the Garonne river (which means life in the Garonne will die).
This is as official a source as you can find, for anyone interested (in French).

Also, if we're talking about French nuclear power plants, most of them are -too- old and need to undergo serious maintenance anyway, so they can remain in use until the next generation is operational (in at least 15 years).

No, it's not an ideal situation. However, there's been a lot of debates about it these past few years (one of which I watched last night tbh), and nuclear power is still the best bet if you want to keep your electric consumption high. In fact, even with moderation, France cannot go below 1/3 of nuclear power.
Neither could Germany btw (yes, this is a cheap shot Edit: but still a light-hearted poke, please don't take the piss ).

23 minutes ago, Zorral said:

I have been told over and over that the new plants don't need water for cooling. 

Yes, most French nuclear power plants are quite old (50 years old or thereabout).

On 7/16/2022 at 11:08 PM, Clueless Northman said:

You of all people here around should've noticed the most important recent development of political ecology. Bluntly, that the biggest "green" parties in the world just decided climate change wasn't such a biggie after all[...]  But when even political parties who actually pretend to care about that turn out not to give a flying fuck, I don't expect anything serious to happen. Not until we literally hang politicians and CEOs from lampposts - and I don't mean it figuratively, mind you. The only thing these scumbags fear is actual physical threats, anything else is beyond their radar because they assume they'll manage to pay their way out of anything on their path.

TBH, I'm kinda hoping more people reach your conclusions.
'tis why I said I expect changes to start happening (they haven't yet).

[Kalbear]

21 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Interestingly enough, that's not quite it, and that article is just wrong (fake news!).
While warmer waters (or lack of water when rivers dry up) are definitely a potential problem down the line, we're not there yet. The reason why nuclear reactors are sometimes turned off during heatwaves is because of environmental regulations, because nuclear plants are not allowed to reject warm water if the river's temperature is already higher than normal.
In fact, three plants have already been granted temporary "exceptions" to keep functioning, for instance the Golfech plant on the Garonne river (which means life in the Garonne will die).
This is as official a source as you can find, for anyone interested (in French).

I guess, though to me it's a distinction without a difference. Not being able to run nuclear plants with river water for cooling because you will cook the river functions the same as not being able to run the nuclear plants with river water for cooling because it doesn't have the same cooling capacity. 

21 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Also, if we're talking about French nuclear power plants, most of them are -too- old and need to undergo serious maintenance anyway, so they can remain in use until the next generation is operational (in at least 15 years).

That's good, I'm sure we'll put global warming on hold for the next 15 years

 

[Rippounet]

22 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

I guess, though to me it's a distinction without a difference. Not being able to run nuclear plants with river water for cooling because you will cook the river functions the same as not being able to run the nuclear plants with river water for cooling because it doesn't have the same cooling capacity.

Fair enough.

22 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

That's good, I'm sure we'll put global warming on hold for the next 15 years

France's choice is to keep the old plants running as long as necessary. It's a hazard, but it's still the best we got. There's no way we can go full renewables in 15 years, and no way we can build new ones faster. OTOH, if we could manage to start lowering electricity consumption, we might achieve a fairly low carbon footprint. That may not even be a choice: relying on old power plants will mean frequent blackouts, until we are reasonable with energy.

 

[Clueless Northman]

57 minutes ago, KalVsWade said:

That's good, I'm sure we'll put global warming on hold for the next 15 years

Oh, nuclear plants can work fine without worsening global warming. The key issue is that they have to work fine without blowing up  Ideally, I'd like to see fission plants fully disappear, though it will take time.

I would be less worried if we kept around a score of top-of-the-art nuclear plants until we have better cleaner power sources available, but since most Western ones are quite ancient models, I'll be relieved once Europe and America don't need them anymore...

 

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

The reason why nuclear reactors are sometimes turned off during heatwaves is because of environmental regulations, because nuclear plants are not allowed to reject warm water if the river's temperature is already higher than normal.

I remember that Italy had to shut down some nuclear plants back in 2003, because Po was running low and was becoming exceedingly hot.