Climate Change III - The Power of Chaos

[ThinkerX]

24 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

That's catastrophising to a ridiculous degree. 

There are four main reasons people are having fewer babies: the perception that it's bad for the environment; the perception that human society is shit and people don't want to bring children into such a shit world; it's too bloody expensive to have kids; and women are being educated and realising they are so much more than baby factories.

If you deal with the first three of those four factors then fertility will almost certainly return to replacement rates over time.

Having children is not the environmental problem, the problem remains the sources of energy we use to raise those children. Climate change is and will always be about ridding ourselves of reliance on fossil fuels. Can a period of declining population help to transition to that? Yes, since it will allow transitions to non-fossil fuel energy sources with a slower rate of demand growth meaning decommissioning of current oil/gas/coal electricity plants sooner.

Meanwhile to no one's surprise our May was the warmest May on record. The report also said 5 of the warmest Mays on record have occurred since 2011, which means at least half of the warmest 10 Mays have occurred since 2011. It's also been exceptionally wet, and I wonder if wetter autumns are going to become standard here as part of the climate change.

Never came across people 'not having babies because its bad for the environment,'

'Perception the Human society is shit and not wanting to raise kids in that environment,' - yes. And given the current political situation, that reason isn't going away anytime soon.

'Bloody expensive to have kids,' - also true, and almost certain to remain that way for a long, long time.

'Women being educated and realizing they are more than baby factories,' yes. And reversing that trend would require measures that even most US conservative whack jobs would hesitate to implement.

As to the rest - the size of a population affects the environment around that population. Small towns are (often) far less environmentally destructive than large cities, and require fewer resources.

My strong suspicion is that the main driver for converting to 'green energy' will be more economic (Peak Oil) than political or environmental.

 

[Zorral]

4 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

'not having babies because its bad for the environment,'

That was on the top of the list for us from the git go-- too many people already, bad for the planet, a bad future.  The cost of having a baby wasn't -- then, but the coSt of raiSing a child to adulthood, and the coSt profe$$ionally and emotionally and phy$ically, yes.  But just being pregnant and giving birth, no. But it is now.

[The Anti-Targ]

3 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

Never came across people 'not having babies because its bad for the environment,'

'Perception the Human society is shit and not wanting to raise kids in that environment,' - yes. And given the current political situation, that reason isn't going away anytime soon.

'Bloody expensive to have kids,' - also true, and almost certain to remain that way for a long, long time.

'Women being educated and realizing they are more than baby factories,' yes. And reversing that trend would require measures that even most US conservative whack jobs would hesitate to implement.

As to the rest - the size of a population affects the environment around that population. Small towns are (often) far less environmentally destructive than large cities, and require fewer resources.

My strong suspicion is that the main driver for converting to 'green energy' will be more economic (Peak Oil) than political or environmental.

 

I know quite a few people who are not breeding to save the environment. Ultimately we can't afford, nor does anyone other than those who actually want human extinction want us, to collectively stop breeding. Collectively we have a responsibility to make sure the kids we are having are well educated, well nourished, and are in good health. So arguably I would say one of the best ways to achieve that is for middle-class progressives to be having a few kids, when those are exactly the people not having kids.

You will note that I only suggest addressing 3 of the 4 main disincentives for breeding. Educated women who feel the world is a safe place, are financially comfortable and know that humanity's environmental impact is sustainable will have kids, they won't have truckloads of kids but we can pretty confidently expect breeding rates to go up.

We're not going to die off in 100 years from lack of breeding. We might die off for other reasons (though I don't think we will), so we have lots of time to sort things out to prevent human extinction from not having kids. There are plenty of reasons to panic about the global situation, running out of people isn't one of them.

[Zorral]

15 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Collectively we have a responsibility to make sure the kids we are having are well educated, well nourished, and are in good health.

Good luck making that happen since it never has before.

[Zorral]

 

[ThinkerX]

Looks like a setup for Hells own hurricane season...

[Zorral]

Feels in every way, from plague, to war, to wildfires, to floods, to famine (due to both plague and volcano ash keeping the sun from shining on planting) as if this is the next 6th-7th century C.E. End Times.  Not to mention the religious insanity.

[The Anti-Targ]

Though this time people should be expecting the Spanish American Inquisition because it is being well telegraphed.

[mcbigski]

On 6/7/2023 at 7:58 PM, ThinkerX said:

 

'Bloody expensive to have kids,' - also true, and almost certain to remain that way for a long, long time.

'Women being educated and realizing they are more than baby factories,' yes. And reversing that trend would require measures that even most US conservative whack jobs would hesitate to implement.

 

Birth rates are lower in societies with low child mortality which makes sense and oddly in societies with economic prosperity (if there's contraceptive available).  I'm pretty sure we could go fission every where, and have enough electricity for 8 to 9 billion people to run their devices.  And have a birthrate right around replacement level.  

It could be a golden age for humanity, except that our leaders are corrupt and venal people.  Bribes pay better than the right thing for people with no morals.

Edited June 12, 2023 by mcbigski

[Toth]

23 hours ago, Zorral said:

 

First result I guess, the fish in the Gulf of Mexico are literally suffocating by the hundreds of thousands:

 

I'm literally paralyzed by despair since I've seen that. We are all so fucked...

[Zorral]

Fire, Water, Air, Earth turn their backs on the world we have made.

~~~~~~~~~~~

"God gave Noah the Rainbow sign, no more water - fire next time?"  James Baldwin  -- 1963

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fire and Ice 
BY ROBERT FROST

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What Ended Last Ice Age May Be Blowing in the Wind

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Apocalypse: Earthquakes, Archaeology, and the Wrath of God

[Toth]

You are also very optimistic today, huh? @Zorral?

[Zorral]

12 minutes ago, Toth said:

You are also very optimistic today, huh?

I have been pessimistic since puberty hit.  Sigh.  

[ThinkerX]

Coming soon to other states?

 

THE INVASION OF THE MORMON CRICKETS!

Millions of 'nightmarish' Mormon crickets invade cities (usatoday.com)

 

[LongRider]

38 minutes ago, ThinkerX said:

Coming soon to other states?

 

THE INVASION OF THE MORMON CRICKETS!

Millions of 'nightmarish' Mormon crickets invade cities (usatoday.com)

 

Mormon crickets are gross and stupid!  Lot's things I miss about Nevada, not Mormon Crickets though. 

[The Anti-Targ]

So it appears El Nino is official now. What that means for us is generally cooler temperatures, dry east and wet west. During La Nina wind generally comes from the northeast (which is warmer) during El Nino wind generally comes from the southwest / west.

Even though NZ temps tend to be cooler during El Nino, globally it seems El Nino is warmer than La Nina, generally speaking. Predictions are that 2024 may be very hot for most of the globe. And dry. Meaning probably  more wildfires in the places that are at risk of wildfires.

Also apparently El Nino has a negative effect on economic output globally amounting to trillions of dollars. 

Edited June 13, 2023 by The Anti-Targ

[The Anti-Targ]

I asked ChatGPT: Can ChatGPT design a global transition plan using currently available technology to eliminate all fossil fuels from road, rail and sea transport and electricity generation by 2050, with a compounding 10% annual increase in electricity demand?

ChatGPT said

Quote

Designing a comprehensive global transition plan to eliminate all fossil fuels from road, rail, and sea transport, as well as electricity generation, by 2050 requires careful analysis, planning, and consideration of various factors. While I can provide a high-level outline for such a plan, it's important to note that the implementation details and feasibility assessments would require in-depth expertise and input from industry professionals, policymakers, scientists, and engineers. The following plan serves as a starting point for discussion:

1. Assess the Current Energy Landscape:

1. • Conduct a thorough assessment of the current energy systems in different regions, including energy sources, infrastructure, consumption patterns, and emissions.
   • Identify the key sectors contributing to fossil fuel consumption, such as road transport, rail, sea transport, and electricity generation.
   • Analyze future energy demand projections, considering the compounding 10% annual increase in electricity demand.

2. Set Clear Targets:

2. • Establish ambitious yet achievable targets for the elimination of fossil fuels in each sector by 2050.
   • Define intermediate milestones to track progress and ensure accountability.
   • Develop specific targets for renewable energy generation capacity to meet the increasing electricity demand.

3. Transition Strategy for Road Transport:

3. • Promote the adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) by providing incentives, subsidies, and infrastructure development for EV charging stations.
   • Encourage research and development in battery technology to improve the range and affordability of EVs.
   • Support the deployment of renewable energy-powered public transport systems, such as electric buses and trams.
   • Explore alternative transportation modes, such as shared mobility services and autonomous vehicles.

4. Transition Strategy for Rail Transport:

4. • Electrify existing rail networks and invest in renewable energy-powered electrification infrastructure.
   • Upgrade and modernize rail systems to improve efficiency and reduce energy consumption.
   • Promote the use of sustainable biofuels or hydrogen-powered trains where electrification is not feasible.

5. Transition Strategy for Sea Transport:

5. • Encourage the development of hybrid or fully electric propulsion systems for smaller vessels and ferries.
   • Explore the use of alternative fuels like hydrogen, ammonia, or biofuels for larger ships and long-distance shipping.
   • Support research and development of innovative technologies to improve the efficiency and sustainability of maritime transportation.

6. Transition Strategy for Electricity Generation:

6. • Increase investment in renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal power.
   • Implement supportive policies and financial incentives to facilitate renewable energy project development.
   • Upgrade and modernize grid infrastructure to accommodate increased renewable energy capacity.
   • Promote energy storage technologies to ensure reliable and continuous power supply.

7. Research and Development:

7. • Allocate significant resources to research and development of emerging technologies like advanced batteries, hydrogen production and storage, carbon capture and storage (CCS), and renewable energy integration.
   • Encourage collaboration between governments, research institutions, and private companies to drive innovation and accelerate technological advancements.

8. International Cooperation and Policy Framework:

8. • Foster international collaboration to share best practices, experiences, and resources.
   • Establish supportive policy frameworks, including carbon pricing, emissions standards, and renewable energy targets.
   • Encourage diplomatic efforts to facilitate cross-border electricity trading and renewable energy integration.

9. Public Awareness and Stakeholder Engagement:

9. • Launch public awareness campaigns to educate and engage citizens in the transition towards a fossil fuel-free future.
   • Involve various stakeholders, including communities, businesses, and non-governmental organizations, in the decision-making process.
   • Address any social or economic challenges arising from the transition, including job displacement and regional impacts.

10. Monitoring, Evaluation, and Adaptation:

10. • Develop robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to track progress towards targets.
    • Regularly assess the feasibility and effectiveness of implemented strategies.
    • Remain flexible and adaptive, adjusting the transition plan as new technologies and opportunities emerge.

Remember, this is a high-level outline, and implementing a comprehensive global transition plan of this scale requires extensive collaboration, funding, technological advancements, and political will. The actual plan would need to be tailored to specific regional contexts, considering factors such as resource availability, infrastructure constraints, and socioeconomic considerations.

Thankfully the infinity gauntlet isn't current technology so ChatGPT can't offer that as the solution.

Edited June 16, 2023 by The Anti-Targ

[IheartIheartTesla]

There is an ongoing lawsuit in Montana by 16 plaintiffs, all of whom are in their teens - suing the state since its Constitution promises a clean environment (paraphrasing). Will be interesting to see how it unfolds (case itself is only supposed to last for 2 weeks, so we'll know the answer real soon). Maybe the way to bring about lasting change in a society like America is to go the legal route.

Edited June 16, 2023 by IheartIheartTesla

[Rippounet]

On 6/30/2023 at 6:07 PM, Ran said:

The idea that our air is of the same shitty quality that it was 50 years ago, that our water is of the same shitty quality it was 50 years ago, that our energy production is as carbon intensive as it was, that our energy usage is not more effecient, etc., is just an absurdity that can't be taken seriously, the paranoia of Chicken Little.

Feel free not to take the facts seriously. Minor reductions in pollution have so far led to stagnation and localized improvement at best, because the overall demands in production keep increasing.
Electricity production is a good example of that. The global share of electricy production through renewables has increased significantly from 1985 to today, from 20% to 30% or 35% if we take very rough numbers. But the global electricity production was about 10,000 TWh in 1985 and is heading toward 30,000 today. If you like Statista, they have a nice graph of that.

But who is the us in your "our" ? Developed countries have of course proved able at maintaining a high quality of life, and they certainly seem determined to keep doing that. But if you look at an indicator like Rockström & al's planetary boundaries, we've now crossed 7 out of 9. It is madness to claim that the environmental impact of humanity is lessening despite the evidence now available, and remarkably short-sighted to believe that this quality of life can be maintained indifinitely.

On 6/30/2023 at 5:32 PM, Heartofice said:

Its not like there are only 2 options: 'What we did before' and 'Piss everyone off and do stupid drug fuelled dancing in the street'. 

Oh, totally, there are certainly more than 2 options. Which one did you choose?

Edit: I'd missed that.

On 6/30/2023 at 6:07 PM, Ran said:

Global carbon emissions per capita has flattened over the last decade, and will likely begin to decline over the next decade or two, at least to a point.

The problem here is you're looking at the wrong graph.

This is the one that matters.

 

Edited July 1, 2023 by Rippounet

[Ran]

On 7/2/2023 at 12:55 AM, Rippounet said:

Feel free not to take the facts seriously.

It's not the facts that I'm not taking seriously.

On 7/2/2023 at 12:55 AM, Rippounet said:

Minor

Minimizing incredible gains because it doesn't fit your preferred narrative of people "doing nothing" is a good reveal of your biases.

On 7/2/2023 at 12:55 AM, Rippounet said:

reductions in pollution have so far led to stagnation and localized improvement at best, because the overall demands in production keep increasing.

And here we get to your economic degrowth biases. If things can be produced cleanly, as increasingly they are, then why do you care if demand for production goes up? Estimates from 2006 about how much solar power generation would exist by 2020 was off by 3000%. Estimates about how much wind-power would exist was off by 400%. We are at essentially the very start of a global transition to renewables, with some estimates placing renewable energy as providing 60% of all electricity by 2035, and 80-90% of all electricity by 2050. 

Quote

But if you look at an indicator like Rockström & al's planetary boundaries, we've now crossed 7 out of 9.

In his 2015 reassessment, which he has used as recently as 2023, the number is more like 1.5 of 9 -- biochemical outflows of nitrogen and phosphorous and the genetic half of biodiversity. 

The thing that gets me is that when I listen to Rockström or read his colleague Michael Mann (of "hockey stick" fame), they both sound a great deal more optimistic than you present yourself are. But then, Michael Mann has specifically called out "doomism" among those concerned about the environment, which can lead them astray due to an unfounded sense of panic.