Climate change: what happens now?

Written By: - Date published: 10:37 am, August 14th, 2018 - 138 comments
Categories: climate change, disaster, Environment, global warming, sustainability - Tags:

Guest post from Tony Veitch (not etc.)

So what happens now?

What happens when the understanding, the awareness, finally filters down and enters the minds of the sheeple that we humans have done irreparable damage to our only home, Planet Earth?

Whether in eight years, as Guy McPherson would have us believe, or about the year 2050 as more mainstream climatologists are now suggesting, conditions on earth will have deteriorated to the extent that human life cannot be sustained. Certainly, we most probably won’t see 2100.

And they will wake to the fact eventually, even if there is a conspiracy among the elite and the knowing to keep them in ignorance for as long as possible.

How do people react – or, more to the point, how should they react? Does a collective despair overwhelm us all? Or do we, as some characters in Neville Shute’s ‘On the Beach’ do, try to cram as much into what little time we have left, even if it ‘kills’ us?

In an ironic way, the more primitive societies may last the longest. Man resident in the great conurbations will perhaps feel the impacts first and more extremely.

But seriously, how does one prepare for the realisation that we humans only have perhaps fifty years left? That we are ‘the sixth mass extinction’?

138 comments on “Climate change: what happens now?”

  1. Antoine 1

    This is ridiculous.

    Put up some evidence that mainstream climatologists believe that humans will be extinct by 2050.

    Or (as there isn’t any such evidence) delete your post. That would be a better option as it would avoid unnecessarily worrying readers.

    A.

    • mickysavage 1.1

      Que?

      There are plenty of predictions along this line. Try this article for a start:

      https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/12/climate-scientist-environment-apocalypse-human-extinction/

      Or this one.

      http://sciencenordic.com/what-will-our-climate-look-2050

      Even if extinction does not happen it is clear that the world will be pretty stuffed.

      Placing one’s head in the sand should not be an option.

      • Antoine 1.1.1

        I see a couple of crackpots suggesting that human populations could be considerably reduced within the next century. I don’t see a mainstream climate scientist asserting that humans will be extinguished by 2050.

        Better to delete this post and try again with a more realistic scenario.

        A.

        • Kevin 1.1.1.1

          Its not going to be the climate directly that causes a reduction in population, but the chaos and mayhem that will be a result of climate change. Look at countries that are barely above sea level for starters.

          • Antoine 1.1.1.1.1

            OK, now you’re talking about ‘a reduction in population’ I start to think about believing you.

            As opposed to the original post, which said _everyone_ was going to be dead in 50 years.

            A.

        • mickysavage 1.1.1.2

          Why?

          What makes it extreme. The melting of the tundra and the adverse weather events in the Northern Hemisphere are causes for concern. I don’t get your reasoning. This is agreed a more extreme view of what may happen but the less extreme views are also terrifying.

          You seem to be saying that unless we can confidently say what will happen the subject should not be debated. That is a recipe for business as usual and for a crisis to occur.

          • Antoine 1.1.1.2.1

            I’m saying that it is not useful to throw ridiculous scenarios out there (everyone dies by 2050). Let’s have a sensible debate rather than scaremongering.

            And if anyone round here has any credible alternative to “business as usual and … a crisis to occur”, I’d love to hear it.

            A.

            • mickysavage 1.1.1.2.1.1

              They are all predictions. This is a more extreme one. Even the lower level ones are terrifying. Why rule it out? And how about you put up an alternative scenario and back this up.

              • Antoine

                > Why rule it out?

                Because it is ridiculous!

                Why present it as a near certainty?

                A.

                • jimekus

                  Trajectories of the Earth System in the Anthropocene
                  Will Steffen, Johan Rockström, Katherine Richardson, Timothy M. Lenton, Carl Folke, Diana Liverman, Colin P. Summerhayes, Anthony D. Barnosky, Sarah E. Cornell, Michel Crucifix, Jonathan F. Donges, Ingo Fetzer, Steven J. Lade, Marten Scheffer, Ricarda Winkelmann, and Hans Joachim Schellnhuber
                  PNAS August 9, 2018. 201810141; published ahead of print August 6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1810141115

                  Where such a threshold might be is uncertain, but it could be only DECADES ahead at a temperature rise of ∼2.0 °C above preindustrial, and thus, it could be within the range of the Paris Accord temperature targets.

                  The impacts of a Hothouse Earth pathway on human societies would likely be massive, sometimes abrupt, and undoubtedly disruptive.

                  —————-

                  Antoine, while you’re there have a look at Fig. 2 – it is the most frightening thing I’ve seen to date.

                  • Antoine

                    > The impacts of a Hothouse Earth pathway on human societies would likely be massive, sometimes abrupt, and undoubtedly disruptive.

                    Happy to agree with that

                    A.

                    • jimekus

                      If you agree that these Terrible Trajectories to Hothouse Earth are only avoidable by global cooperation to stop burning carbon in order to avoid extinction, please provide evidence that such global cooperation has in any way even the slightest possibility of happening. Also retract your previous comments about the lack of mainstream evidence (as Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America isn’t any such discredited evidence).

                      If you can Imagine that you are an active 90 year old chain smoker, then you and your doctors must realize that paradox that stopping smoking will kill you simply because you bypassed so many other natural Vitamin B pathways of normal biochemistry. Likewise the global dimming from burning dirty sulfated carbon fuels is what’s keeping us alive.

                • Draco T Bastard

                  Because it is ridiculous!

                  [citation needed]

                  There is plenty of evidence going back years that things are going to be much worse than the worst case scenario from the IPCC.

                  Why present it as a near certainty?

                  Probably because it is. If you hadn’t been denying the evidence all along you’d realise that.

                • https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-timeline-of-the-mass-extinction-events-on-earth.html

                  “Permian–Triassic extinction

                  This mass extinction, which occurred 251 million years ago, is considered the worst in all history because around 96% of species were lost. Ancient coral species were completely lost. “The Great Dying” was caused by an enormous volcanic eruption that filled the air with carbon dioxide which fed different kinds of bacteria that began emitting large amounts of methane. The Earth warmed, and the oceans became acidic. Life today descended from the 4% of surviving species. After this event, marine life developed a complexity not seen before and snails, urchins, and crabs emerged as new species.”

                  For God’s sake, what in our present situation leads you to believe the 6th mass extinction will be any lesser than this one – triggered by excess carbon dioxide?

                  • Ali Ababwa

                    The Permian-Triassic extinction event took about 13 million years from start to finish.

      • Andre 1.1.2

        That Motherjones piece relies very heavily on MacPherson. Yes, he of the confident prediction that humans will be extinct in 8 years. It also cites Wadhams and Nissen, who are credible, particularly with respect to what’s going on in the Arctic, but they don’t suggest human extinction is looming, just that it’s going to get very unpleasant for a lot of us. Similarly the sciencenordic piece makes no comment about imminent human extinction, but talks about how the choices we make now will affect how bad it’s going to get.

        From a simple physics and geochemistry point of view, it’s utterly implausible the oceans and atmosphere will heat up and chemically change fast enough to cause the extinction of humans within 50 years, or even 100 years. Even with the worst case tipping points and step changes in greenhouse gases from methane burps etc.

        What we are realistically playing for now is whether the tropics and subtropics remain habitable for humans, or whether in the next few decades we are going to see annual heat and starvation death counts in the tens or hundreds of millions coupled with massive migration pressure out of those areas. Along with agriculture failures and ecosystem disruptions in temperate and higher latitude zones.

        It’s also worth noting those areas likeliest to be hardest hit by climate change overlap strongly with the areas currently experiencing the fastest population growth and populations that have contributed least per capita to the problem we’re now facing.

        Also at play from the actions we take now (or not) is whether the oceans remain a productive food source for hundreds of millions if not billions of people, or whether our seafood delicacies get reduced to the occasional jellyfish.

        • marty mars 1.1.2.1

          Good comment. MacPherson and his doomed opinions are impossible to take seriously. They cloud the issue. Better to not bother with the doomerdeathcult and stick to the physics and facts – they are nightmareish enough and they require action now.

          • Andre 1.1.2.1.1

            MacPherson really makes me angry. He’s talking way outside his field of expertise while trading on his academic past to fake an aura of credibility.

            His fuckwittery isn’t harmless, I’ve just had one of my near and dear go through a serious mental health crisis with suicidal thoughts, and while he’s smart enough to pick MacPherson is utterly lacking in credibility, from the comments he made I can’t help suspecting there was still a background subconscious effect. And for those that aren’t smart enough to see through MacPherson while they’re going through that kind of crisis, it could quite easily be enough to tip someone over the edge.

            • marty mars 1.1.2.1.1.1

              Yes i agree about the McPherson. I can’t stand him and his phoney war.

              Sorry to hear about your loved one’s difficulties. I work with people going through similar things. It’s hard for everyone.

            • AB 1.1.2.1.1.2

              Watched MacPherson videos a couple of times recently and he has all the appearances of a flake precisely because of the precision with which he picks dates – ice free Arctic in September this year and a collapse of civilisation in September or October this year (probably October) due to grain crop failures.
              FFS! He’s actually talking about real phenomena, but picks dates from out of backside, which principled scientists never do.
              Wadhams is totally different, understated, cautious, but obviously terribly worried.
              And yes – I wouldn’t dream of giving MacPherson air time when young people are about in case they are terrified by what they hear. I have memories of being about 8 during the early 1960’s cold-war hysteria and actually building a tree-house (of sorts) in the bush to hide in when the Russians came.

      • Gosman 1.1.3

        None of those articles suggest the planet will definitely be in a catastrophic climate change situation by 2050.

        The first one suggests it might be possible (but also stated the Artic would be ice free this year, which it is not http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2018/07/) .

        The second discusses the worse case scenario by the IPCC which has the temperature being 5 degrees higher by 2100.

        • Tricledrown 1.1.3.1

          Gossip boy reading your link thoroughly it shows both the Antarctic and Artic Ice is in continual decline at the recent average at 5% per Decade.
          This would mean at present rates a 40% decline or more if more fires deposit more smoke particals cover the polar ice cap’s increasing the melt rate.
          This article is not making any overall predictions.
          But is pointing to evidence that increases in temperatures and more wildfires mean the rate of Polar Ice melt will increase rapidly with many different causes all to do with human activity.
          One of the most damaging effects is the of sea Ice which protects the Solid land, is disappearing when it does more rapid melt will occur.
          The National govt paid $32 million towards Ice core drilling I have read all the Data connected to this research and it points to catastrophic climate change.
          I went to lectures by the scientists who did the research.
          Right wing politicians have ignored the research.

    • Bill 1.2

      I agree it’s unwise to put definitive timelines on stuff. And I’d say “extinct by 2050” is worthy of one of those sandwich board fellas, but…

      …there is basic, widespread agreement (including from well regarded and conservative global financial institutions such as the World Bank and others) that global human civilisation doesn’t survive 4 degrees of warming.

      And if all pledges made in Paris are honoured, then we’re going to hitting something very close to 4 degrees of warming.

      When does that happen?

      Well, that depends on the rate that we emit CO2. But it most assuredly will happen unless we stop producing CO2 emissions.

      And this.

      • Antoine 1.2.1

        > there is basic, widespread agreement (including from well regarded and conservative global financial institutions such as the World Bank and others) that global human civilisation doesn’t survive 4 degrees of warming.

        You got a link on that?

        Cos I’m looking at the 2012 World Bank report discussing the impacts of 4 degrees of warming, and it _doesn’t_ say that global human civilisation would end.

        Sure, it says “a 4°C world is likely to be one in which communities, cities and countries would experience severe disruptions, damage, and dislocation,” but that’s not the same thing.

        A.

        • mickysavage 1.2.1.1

          We can all celebrate and stop worrying. Humanity is not facing extinction, just likely severe disruptions, damage, and dislocation. Phew …

          • Antoine 1.2.1.1.1

            > Humanity is not facing extinction

            Then why does your site still feature a post under the byline “How does humanity prepare for the realisation that humans only have perhaps fifty years left?”?

            A.

            • mickysavage 1.2.1.1.1.1

              Stop trolling. You do know what “prediction” and “perhaps” mean?

              • Antoine

                I’m not trolling. Rather, the Standard is being alarmist and irresponsible.

                A.

                • Grey Area

                  You are trolling. Stop it. G.

                • Tricledrown

                  Antione you say humans are going to undergo dislocation stress etc.
                  That’s at present rates of pollution.
                  Double the number of cars planes use of resources.
                  Then what.

              • Gosman

                Where was the prediction that we only have “perhaps” 50 years left?

              • greywarshark

                The question arises what will humans do as things get worse and lots of things become extinct or burn up or something? One thing is sure and some persons will not be worried – Antoine and Gosman and ? will be fending off all negative information. Like this;- Comment – Antoine But, Comment – Antoine No., and so forth and on.

                Refute, Refute, Refute.

          • Gosman 1.2.1.1.2

            Pretty much what Humanity dealt with over the past 100,000 years then.

            • cleangreen 1.2.1.1.2.1

              No Gosman we did not hae mined all the earth back then and produced so manny toxic chenicals as we have now today that is by itself contibuting to our global poisoning as we speak.

              I past generations only had lead poisoning not the chemical soup we now live inside of today.

              we are killing our nselves slowly so dont worry the mother earth will take longer and snuff us out more slowly than we are doing it to ourselves now.

              For instance did you know what outgeassses into your home that you shut up air tight today when you have that new plastic carpet you just had fitted.

              Read this; we are living in a toxic soup;

              http://www.sixwise.com/newsletters/05/03/22/the-toxic-dangers-of-carpetingare-the-carpets-in-your-home-or-office-a-health-hazard.htm
              And this

              https://healthybuilding.net/blog/126-scotchgard-and-stainmaster-a-precautionary-tale-for-the-green-building-movement

              Scotchgard™ and Stainmaster™: A Precautionary Tale for the Green Building Movement
              Bill Walsh | February 24, 2006

              “Researchers at Johns Hopkins Hospital drew blood from the umbilical cords of 300 newborns and reported this month that ninety-nine percent of the babies were born with trace levels of perfluorooctanoic acid, usually called PFOA or C-8. [1] This industrial chemical was, until very recently, a critical component in the manufacture of certain fabric and carpet treatment products such as Scotchgard™ and Stainmaster™, as well as Teflon™ and other nonstick and stain-resistant products. [2]

              It is well understood that chemical exposures in utero and during childhood can produce devastating health problems in adulthood. [3] The evidence increasingly suggests that early life exposures to certain chemicals can lead to health problems not only in adulthood, but also down through subsequent generations.[4]”

              Yuk::::::

              The Toxic Dangers of Carpeting:Are the Carpets in Your Home or Office a Health Hazard?
              by SixWise.com

              Walking across your soft, wall-to-wall carpet with bare feet may seem pleasant enough, and we won’t deny that it does feel cozy, but there are some unpleasant and downright dangerous things about carpeting that deserve attention.

              In America, we love wall-to-wall carpeting–in fact, according to the Carpet and Rug Institute more than two-thirds of American floors have them–despite the fact that they contain toxic byproducts that are released into our homes and even inhaled and absorbed into our bodies.

              Carpet Samples

              It looks innocent enough, but carpets are made from synthetic fibers that have been treated with toxic chemicals that outgas into your home.

              Carpets Emit Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in Your Home

              Almost all carpet is made from synthetic fibers and those fibers have been treated with synthetic chemicals that “outgas” into your home. Here’s a list of some carpet “ingredients”:

              Petroleum byproducts and synthetics (polypropylene, nylon, acrylic)
              Soil and stain repellents
              Vinyl or latex
              PVC
              Urethane
              Antistatic sprays
              Artificial dyes
              Antimicrobial treatments
              After being exposed to these chemicals and breathing them in or absorbing them through the skin, some people may feel symptoms such as headache, dizziness or nausea right away.

              But often times, no symptoms are felt. In the long-term, however, no one knows for certain what the effects of these chemicals may be. The EPA has said that no cause-and-effect relationship between carpet emissions and health problems has been proven. However, says Mark Gold from Holistic Healing, “Please pay attention to this warning: Sucking down toxic chemicals may seem okay now, but you may pay a very heavy price in the future.”

              For instance, carpets may contain:

              Known carcinogens such as p-Dichlorobenzene. These chemicals may also cause hallucinations, nerve damage and respiratory illness in humans.

              4-PC, the chemical that gives carpets their distinctive “new carpet smell” and is associated with eye, nose and upper respiratory problems.

              Mothproofing chemicals, which contain naphthalene.

              Fire retardants with PBDEs, which may cause damage to thyroid, immune system and brain development functions in humans.

              Older carpets can be more problematic than new ones for two reasons:

              Older carpets may contain older, more toxic chemicals that have since been banned from the market

              Older carpets accumulate toxins (such as cigarette smoke, pesticide sprays, paint fumes, etc.) and can slowly release them over time. Further, carpets with PVC backing may contain plasticizers that can react with moisture or humidity, resulting in an odor.

              What can You Do?

              There are several actions you can take to reduce your exposure to carpet emissions.

              Choose Natural Carpeting: Wool or hemp are two alternatives, but make sure they haven’t been chemically treated (most are).

              Green Label Plus Certification: In 2004, the Carpet and Rug Institute started the Green Label Plus Certification, which certifies that carpets are free from 13 toxic chemicals. Look for carpets with this certification.

              Recommended Reading

              The Most Unknown, Underrated but Crucial Health Tool

              Dust Dangers: What Exactly is Dust, and Why Can it be so Dangerous?

              Exposure to Air Pollution Linked to Genetic Abnormalities

              Finding Solutions to Toxic Carpeting January 31, 2005

              Dangerous Toxins That Live in Your Carpeting

              Your Home Carpet

        • Bill 1.2.1.2

          You got a link on that?

          Yes. Or at least I did have. They were embedded in this paragraph from an old post I wrote in 2013, but seem to have moved.

          And we can expect temperatures in line with the Burdigalian – ie 4-6 degrees C above pre-industrial levels by 2040 or 2050 according to the estimates of such conservative institutions as the International Energy Agency, the World Bank and others.

          I’ll have time later today to attempt tracking them down, and I’ll come back to you.

          Meanwhile, here’s Kevin Anderson from 2012 – (pdf page 72)

          There is a widespread view that a 4°C future is incompatible with an organised global community, is likely to be beyond ‘adaptation’, is devastating to the majority of eco-systems & has a high probability of not being stable (i.e. 4°C would be an interim temperature on the way to a much higher equilibrium level).

          • Antoine 1.2.1.2.1

            > Meanwhile, here’s Kevin Anderson from 2012 – (pdf page 72)
            > “There is a widespread view that a 4°C future is incompatible with an organised global community”

            I see that is Kevin Anderson’s view – although I don’t see his reasoning set out. Nor do I see “basic, widespread agreement” (by which I think you mean general acceptance) of his view.

            A.

          • Bill 1.2.1.2.2

            Alternatively, google search “civilisation and 4 degrees” and see what you get (hint: you’re going to get stuff like the following)…

            Professor Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and former climate adviser to the German Chancellor and the EU, asks rhetorically: “What is the difference between two degrees (of temperature increase) and four degrees?”

            “The difference,” he said, “is human civilisation”.

            • Antoine 1.2.1.2.2.1

              Yes, that’s the top link. Then there’s a bunch of different links saying different things. Many reference the World Bank study, which _doesn’t_ predict that 4 degrees would end global civilsation.

              Can we agree that a 4 degree rise would cause widespread upheaval, shitloads of deaths, environmental damage, and the collapse of civilsation in _some_ areas? I don’t see anyone arguing with that, and I’m happy to leave it there if you are.

              A.

              • SPC

                How does a nation cope with the arrival of refugees that exceed in number that of their own population?

                Trade will be affected, because currencies will be all over the place and there will be severe trauma on the banking system – a systemic crash and reboot is likely (with greater government involvement in allocation of money).

              • Dennis Frank

                Well, based on my reading, you’re minimising the 4 degree scenario too much. Global civilisation degenerates into dystopia around then. Sooner, if the methane clathrate trigger goes at 3 degrees. Pockets of survival, perhaps even some regions partially resilient.

                • Antoine

                  Isn’t that pretty much what I said?

                  A.

                  • Dennis Frank

                    Okay, we agree. Thought you were suggesting global civilisation would survive as a system through that temperature rise. Too many subsystems becoming chaotic or breaking down simultaneously for that to happen. Localisation of culture will have already become an embedded trend by then. Regional collaboration still feasible but unrealiable. National coherence via govt looking like a shredded net.

                • Gosman

                  You assume civilisation descends in to dystopia. Given advances in lab grown food it is quite possible that we radically re-orientate away from agriculture and rely on manufactured food supplies instead. Given the large amount of extra energy the Earth will capture there is a huge potential around energy supplies as well. The main element in the maintenance of modern civilisation are abundant, cheap energy and stable food supply. Both of these are still possible even in the worse case scenario.

                  • Dennis Frank

                    Yes they are. I see that stuff as part of a design for resilience that our politicos ought to be moving into.

                    We need the Nats to stop treating their bluegreens like a dog in a kennel. Bluegreen thinking must be acknowledged as an operational strategy. We need to use that technofix expertise.

                  • Rather have a steak and cheese pie than your lab made pills, mate.

                    • Hanswurst

                      Who said anything about pills?

                    • Gosman did,- further on down the post. Aka laboratory made food. And OK,- if you want a synthetic cheese burger , – you are welcome to it.

                    • Exkiwiforces

                      Don’t worry I’ve tasted eggs assist and anyother crap food the yanks dish out and quite frankly Gossman you can stick that shit up your feckie as it tastes like shit.

                  • Tricledrown

                    Gossipboy to grow the lab food you need raw ingredient’s.

              • Bill

                Can we agree that a 4 degree rise would cause …

                Yeah Antione, I wrote that global human civilisation doesn’t survive 4 degrees of warming.

                Anderson says the same thing in different words – incompatible with an organised global community”

                And I think I’m on safe ground to claim that in all the posts I’ve written on AGW and in all the comments I’ve made on AGW, that I’ve never written that all traces of human civilisation would be gone.

                You are able to grasp that “the collapse of civilsation in _some_ areas” (as you put it) is exactly and precisely the end of globally integrated human civilisation, yes – ie, that things get “patchwork” and disparate?

                Maybe your reading of the original comment was too hasty – I dunno.

  2. Stunned Mullet 2

    Perhaps it would be prudent to get a local secondary or tertiary science teacher to review your scientific musings before publishing them.

    • You are not knocking our education systems , are you?… after all today’s students are tomorrows adults…

      • cleangreen 2.1.1

        Stunned mullet will be certainly stunned when he/she cant find any oxygen after the concentration dropes to low for human life to exist without an oxygen mask; – bet they haven’t thought of this yet have they yet?

        http://scrippso2.ucsd.edu/

        A warning it has now begun and who knows whether it will increase faster going forward now?

        Atmospheric Oxygen Levels are Decreasing
        Oxygen levels are decreasing globally due to fossil-fuel burning. The changes are too small to have an impact on human health, but are of interest to the study of climate change and carbon dioxide. These plots show the atmospheric O2 concentration relative to the level around 1985. The observed downward trend amounts to 19 ‘per meg’ per year. This corresponds to losing 19 O2 molecules out of every 1 million O2 molecules in the atmosphere each year.

  3. Dennis Frank 3

    I doubt he meant to imply that. Conditions deteriorating to the extent that the ongoing existence of humanity is unsustainable is a hypothetical extrapolation of current trends. Whenever climate scientists produce consensual statements (IPCC) they are extremely cautious around such extrapolation.

    Impressions to the contrary are driven by alarmist psychology. They are merely states of mind. What readers ought to be worried about is illuminated by considering the difference between global warming as an average trend and disaster scenarios produced by scientific evidence of tipping points.

    Global warming induced boiled frog psychology in the populace. Few want to look at the evidence, therefore politicians produce policy based on the ignorance of the many to get elected. Democracy ensures that the status quo continues. Folks driven by a sense of urgency must therefore do an end-run around democracy to get a suitable result for humanity. Twenty years of failing to learn this lesson so far.

    Trigger points derive from complexity theory, and the climate is produced by complex natural systems in mutual interaction (Gaia). Triggering is indeterminate in theory as well as in practice. Evidence of trends towards tipping points has been comprehensively compiled by many researchers and authors during the past 30 years. The precautionary principle has emerged in consequence as our sound guide to public policy. Implementation via contingency planning is kicking in. Slowly.

    • Exactly so, Dennis – the boiled frog scenario. It’s all gonna be all right – until it isn’t.

      Frankly, I don’t think we can be too alarmist. The changes in climate we are experiencing are to result of our emissions of thirty years ago. We’ve still got a long way to go to reach peak emissions – and 4 degrees looms!

      We have to wake up humanity to the impending catastrophe, otherwise we’ll all sleep walk to extinction. Tinkering won’t cut the mustard any more – we need to be really radical, even to the point of making NZ ‘fortress NZ’.

      • Dennis Frank 3.1.1

        I agree Tony. It’s where Winston, if he can transcend conservatism, and the Greens can do symbiosis. National self-reliance. So concurrent with foreign trade, we must develop the design for that.

  4. AsleepWhileWalking 4

    I think its a lie that humanity will be extinct in a few hundred years.

    The rate of loss in terms of biodiversity is accelerating. The fires in British Columbia, dust storms in Australia, temperatures reaching into the 50s in places, tornadoes in NZ on a regular basis…the earth is doing what George Carlin predicted – kicking us off the planet.

    That doesn’t take centuries to accomplish.

  5. SPC 5

    Hyping up my highly atuned prediction drive I note

    A unknowns

    1. Maunder muminum yes or no, if yes how strong and for how long?
    2. The existence of a tipping point, and if and or when we reach it – see 1 (which may delay us triggering it)

    B knowns

    1. we have set ourselves plans of action (targets to reach) for around 2050
    2. carbon etc use prior to 2050 will still be growing the total build up in the following decades

    Concerns
    1. there will be more and worse droughts and floodings
    2. there will be economic refugees forcing their way into safer nations
    3. there will be pressure on the sufficiency of food for the human population
    4. there will be difficulty affording supply of food to those unable to pay for it (in the first instance those receiving the refugees)
    5. nation states will consider puting their own first by seizing (where they are able) control of local water (and arable land) resources
    6. there is a higher risk of war
    7. those who buy and farm land in other countries (for export products) will suffer nationalisations
    8. humanity will be told the immediate problem is over-population, thus the only answer is to lock out the refugees and let them die to save the species – thus those behind the gate can live on as before.
    9. once the experts identify what the future global environment stability will look out, the ones who decide will adopt a methodology to manage the gated community survivor population accordingly (and the means to do this are already being developed and trialled by the way).

    • Antoine 5.1

      All sounded credible until 9., which sounds pretty flaky. Since when did the experts run anything?

      A.

      • SPC 5.1.1

        The ones who decide, have never been the experts.

        • Dennis Frank 5.1.1.1

          Yep, the owners/operators of the control system will prioritise their class survival first. But just as ants farm aphids, they need to continue harvesting business profits, so they have to incorporate a design to preserve productive enterprise as their secondary priority.

          Then, since businesses can’t exist without customers, a sufficient number of plebs will have to be preserved via system design. Don’t fix a system that ain’t broke, so they will preserve capitalism in modified form rather than design for resilience in the long term.

          • Exkiwiforces 5.1.1.1.1

            Yes, trying to get the Neo- Libs/ Cons to think long term instead of their silly thinking that market is always right is going to be the hard part and trying break ideology even harder.

            First step is that should be taken at Government level is to get rid the accrue accounting that is force on government departments by treasury as they paying for the pass not for the future especially IRT the Defence, 1st Responses , Civil Defence etc for example if the NZDF got rid of the Captial Charge payments that would free up about a quarter of the Defence budget for new equipment or raise additional units like an extra Engineer SQN within 2 Field Engineer Regt which is currently not funded for atm.

            Change has to start from the top and lead from the top down.

    • Exkiwiforces 5.2

      I fully agree with your assumptions, which are inline with a number of staff papers that I have read and a number cse’s that I have done at a SNCO and Junior Officer level before I was medically discharged when we have discussed the effects of CC IRT to Security base effects under Chatham House Rules and Strategic level planning.

      Two things I would like to add is CC refugees from low laying areas especially from the South Pacific. Trying to get my head round 9: since so-called experts are such a diverse lot that trying to get consensus from them would like trying to crack a walnut with a sledge hammer.

  6. Jenny 6

    All this talk of the size of disaster and when it will hit is speculation at best.

    However, apart from the deniers, I think we can all agree the hit will be massive and devastating and probably come within our children’s lifetimes, and then continue to worsen from then.

    As to how big the catastrophe really is, and as to how near to the brink we are. Our resident Earth Sciences expert, Lynn Prentice, might like to weigh in here, and gave us his opinion.

    I think we need to get back to the original question at the beginning of this post

    “Climate change: what happens now?”

    Whatever the size of the disaster or the time line of when it hits, to me the far more interesting question (and possibly even more controversial one), is what we need to be doing right now to combat it?

    • Exkiwiforces 6.1

      How long is a piece of string Jenny and that’s the 64 million question atm? Unfortunately we really don’t know, but we have number of assumptions, but assumptions are not fact until proven otherwise as are really stepping into the unknown atm and past events to do hold some clues, but us humans weren’t around then.

      As we all agree it’s not looking good. There is an old saying in Military Strategic planning and operations planning, we planned for worst scenario case and hope for the best case scenario as no plan survives first contact with the enemy forces and in this case CC.

      • Jenny 6.1.1

        Or, as we were told in the Girl Guides. Expect the best, but prepare for the worst.

        There are just too many variables and such a huge subject, with an intersection with many disciplines for it ever to be an exact science.

        Earth system science (ESS) is the application of systems science to the Earth sciences.[1][2][3][4] In particular, it considers interactions between the Earth’s “spheres”—atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere,[5] geosphere, pedosphere, biosphere,[6] and, even, the magnetosphere[7]—as well as the impact of human societies on these components.[8] At its broadest scale, Earth system science brings together researchers across both the natural and social sciences, from fields including ecology, economics, geology, glaciology, meteorology, oceanography, paleontology, sociology, and space science.[9] Like the broader subject of systems science, Earth system science assumes a holistic view of the dynamic interaction between the Earth’s spheres and their many constituent subsystems, the resulting organization and time evolution of these systems, and their stability or instability.[10][11][12] Subsets of Earth system science include systems geology[13][14] and systems ecology,[15] and many aspects of Earth system science are fundamental to the subjects of physical geography[16][17] and climate science.[18]

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_system_science

        And while, supercomputers around the world are busy churning out some more definitive answers

        This doesn’t mean that we should wait to act with what we do know about human-induced climate change.

        We know it is real, and we know it is coming.

        • Exkiwiforces 6.1.1.1

          Absolutely correct Jenny, as the a famous Prussian as member of the once famous General Staff said “ A half ass plan is better than having than no plan at all”.

          If we don’t start planning now on the effects or likely effects of CC what hope have got in the future?

          We seen to have become a reactive society nowadays since the advent of Neo-Lib/ Con economic theory than a proactive society we used to be, as we use to at ways at doing things better for the greater good of society which resulted in long term savings in the future rather than short term monetary savings of the present.

          As an old Boy Air Scout “Always be prepared” was the motto, I can’t remember what the old (school) Army Cadet motto was??? probably of similar vein more likely in some funky Latin since the old school cadets have been around since Adam was knee to a grasshopper.

          • greywarshark 6.1.1.1.1

            I think that reactive now – once proactive is a big part of the ridiculous way that we fail to press government to say set up task forces to in each region to get planning and moving. Participatory so concerned citizens can belong How to shift services to higher ground and when, how to design houses so some can be part buried for coolness or in case of fire etc.

            • Exkiwiforces 6.1.1.1.1.1

              Can’t fully agree more, unless they can make a buck here and now, instead of doing it right the first time and saving money, the environment in the future or at least looking into the future. As one of DS staff to be successful at Military planning think and act like chess player as you have think at least 3-4 moves ahead of your opponent.

              Our current crop of pollies are shit scare to make any long term decisions and rather fiddle around the edges, sometimes I wonder what old Piggy Muldoon would do? It would be “don’t Tinker around at the Edges you fools, Think Big and think of the future you bloody fools as there would no NZ without your children , grandchildren and great grandchildren”. I know he a lot of faults, but his heart was in the right place unlike the selfish bastards of the last 30 odd yrs and he like a lot of his generation including myself as a modern day know what war is/ like which should be the last and final option that no one should have ever to contend or put up with.

              It was interesting to note on the ABC’s News Finance report that old mate Musk wants to make Tesla private and the Saudi Wealth Fund are providing the finance.

              • KJT

                Didn’t like Muldoon at the time, but over time my respect for him has grown.

                Unlike today’s National MP’s, he never profited from the job, had a vision for more than three years ahead, and tried to do his best for New Zealand.

                Social welfare for sheep was flawed, but “think big” went on to make a fortune for the private buyers, in the fire sale.

                Also you have to think in the context of the periods steeply rising oil prices.

                If only present day politicians planned ahead, for more than the next set of polls.

                • Exkiwiforces

                  Yes, (Sid and Kiwi Keith was a bit before my time, but I will say this for Kiwi Keith did a bloody good job a resisting the pressure to send more troops to Nam from the Aussie and US Governments from whatI’ve seen in the main library in Darwin also there is a book from JP Cross who report the Uk Government when they got a requested the US Government to commit forces to Laos) Kirk, Rowling and Muldoon had there hearts in the right place and were looking to the future at making New Zealand a better place as they knew what alternative was coming from the depression, through WW2 unlike the current bunch of selfish bastards of the last 30 odd years.

                  As for SMP one only needs to visit the US, Canada and the EU just to name a few at what farming subsidies do the environment and to the overall economy.

          • Tricledrown 6.1.1.1.2

            Exkiwiforces a half ass plan is better than no plan
            The everything will be alright brigade are like the frog in the pot of cold water that don’t notice the temp rising as the pot is boiled.
            Ironically scientists have found that frogs are the bell weather for climate change.

            • Exkiwiforces 6.1.1.1.2.1

              Yeah mate, I’ve just found my second cane toad tonight (well my Jack Russell did) and is now the freezer. We are still two mths out from the Build Up and they start to appear already when they should be still buried underground sleeping until the build up starts.

              Not a good sign

      • Jenny 6.1.2

        ….no plan survives first contact with the enemy forces and in this case CC.
        ExKF

        Agreed.

        The common corollary of this old military saying being; But if you don’t have a plan you are in headless chicken territory.

        In preparing for battle, I have always found that plans are useless but planning is indispensable.
        Dwight D. Eisenhower

        What Eisenhower meant, is that by having a plan and putting it into practice we find out in practice what works and what doesn’t.

        P.S. And the enemy forces in my opinion is not climate change as such, but vested interest and political inertia.

        What we need in my opinion, is a plan to overcome these forces.

        • Exkiwiforces 6.1.2.1

          Old Ike’s saying is very app indeed, in fact he is one of the Generals that the US has had in modern times apart from Powell until he got burnt by Bush Jnr.

          Anyway how to overcome vested interests and political inertia???

          Apart from overthrowing the government by other means or adopting more hardline approach to the current economic thinking, I really don’t know how it could be done?

          If big changes did happen, there would a hell of a lot pain like what under Douglas and Ruthie which a lot of people don’t want see or do again which is sort of stopping any meaningful change atm.

          • Jenny 6.1.2.1.1

            Based on how we made New Zealand Nuclear weapons free. Which was achieved against the vast weight and pressure of the international industrial military complex.

            Tells me that it is possible to overcome the power of vested interest and shift the politicians to take bold and iconic actions t.

            Achieving that breakthrough; saw all sorts of binding deals and agreements and military and security service intermeshing links, some open, some covert, overturned.

            So we know it can be done.

            We need to ditch the simpering Fast Follower Doctrine followed by John Key and start taking a bold and inspiring international lead.

            Zero new coal mines are within reach.

            The same with deep sea oil and gas prospecting; In my opinion a total, (not just partial) moratorium on all oil and gas prospecting is also not beyond us.

            If we can do these things then others will be inspired to do the same.

            “We’ve always wanted to be what is affectionately called a fast follower,” Mr Key said.

            http://www.newswire.co.nz/2012/11/new-zealand-to-follow-in-global-emitters-carbon-footprints/

            Sez him!

            Kiwis overwhelmingly think New Zealand should take action on climate change even if other nations don’t

            • Exkiwiforces 6.1.2.1.1.1

              I slightly disagree with you on coal IRT’s to steel making, smelting base metals apart from aluminium especially bending nickel into steel etc in the short to medium term. I know the old family coal mine at Blackball our coal was used for foundry’s, Hillside workshops for building locomotives, wagons and carriages etc and that was on the orders of my late great grandfather and even during the war. He said burning coal for heat and warmth is a waste of good product and energy from his POV as electricity is the way to good for the future unless we find away to use the sun or wind to keep our houses dry and warm.

              We’ve got some of the best iron sands and coal in the world along with sands, clays to make cement, rare earths and base metals to make our own solar plants and wind power plants, trains even solar cars. If we can’t get the stuff here in NZ then we get it from across the ditch either as a raw product or has been refine.

              Here’s something the politicians could and should do from my POV, is scrap GST from all EV’s and all GST collected from all sales of all vehicles using fossil fuels apart CNG/LPG powered vehicles goes to support building charging stations around the country.

              The same should be for homeand business solar/ wind power generation knock GST for either back to the grid or off grid power systems and GST collected from all power bills not using wind or solar to support upgrades to substations, trains mission lines etc to allow extra power back into the grid.

              My Disclosure I hold shares in the following companies
              Toro Energy
              OZ Mins
              All NZ and Oz power companies that don’t use fracked gas
              Woodside
              South 32
              FMG
              Blue Scope Steel
              APA
              Beach Energy,
              Vaia Energy,
              2 otherbase metal/ iron ore companies not yet in production.
              Rare Earth, Sands and Lithium mines which there is about 8 separate companies.

  7. Kevin 7

    There has already been a ‘trial run’, for won’t of a better expression, on a smaller scale than what is being predicted.

    And this was caused by a volcano blowing its top (Krakatoa is the likely suspect).

    A two part video that was shown on UK programme, Timeline. Well worth watching

  8. Gosman 8

    Looking at the worst case scenario then the likely outcome is the mid latitude areas of the planet will become virtually uninhabitable. Unfortunately this will impact Billions of humans but unfortunately for them they also live in the the poorest and least powerful militarily and economically parts of the planet. As the climate causes greater issues for them they are likely to become poorer and even less powerful than they are at the moment. This is a massive tragedy which hopefully can be avoided but I’m unsure how this will lead to the complete breakdown of civilisation across the Globe.

    • SPC 8.1

      There will be a significant impact on “inter-connectedness”, apart from the defence of borders from a billion refugees (puts Merkel’s million into context), there will be greater focus on local food security and “supply” contracts with nations who have the money and military leverage – such as China. This will distort normal trade patterns, the current banking/payments system may not survive etc.

      • Gosman 8.1.1

        That is the beauty of the money system. It adapts to whatever the conditions dictate.

        • WILD KATIPO 8.1.1.1

          ” I’ll swap you 10 colourful shells for 7 of those shiny feathers ” ….

        • McFlock 8.1.1.2

          you can’t eat money.

          If China decides it needs to inflict “rice offensives” on the Asia-Pacific regions like the Japanese did in Manchuria, they won’t pay us for it.

        • Tricledrown 8.1.1.3

          The money system is a fragile construct
          Built on a promise of payment.
          Who says they have to keep the promise.

      • “inter-connectedness” – yes, an interesting topic. If areas of the world around the equator, say between the tropics of Capricorn and Cancer, become too hot for human habitation, what will that do to sea transport? The hazards of a couple of weeks sailing (or motoring) across the ‘wet-bulb’ areas of the world may effectively cut the planet in two – with little direct links between them. What happens to the millions in Europe and Asia may be only of academic interests to us as we struggle to adapt to climate change.

        • Gosman 8.1.2.1

          Automated shipping. Air travel will still be viable.

          • Dennis Frank 8.1.2.1.1

            Air travel has only continued due to fracking keeping peak oil from kicking in. Price stability is the thing to watch here. Airline bankruptcies happening simultaneously would make foreign trade real dodgy, huh?

            And automated shipping ain’t a thing. Believe that after you believe in automated cars that don’t crash themselves.

          • Tricledrown 8.1.2.1.2

            Gossipboy Civilian aircraft are easy targets.

    • Tricledrown 8.2

      Gosman so how powerful is NZ.
      4 old frigates with very limited capability.
      A few clapped out herculies
      Some modern helicopters.
      A minute army/airforce/navy.

  9. This is REAL global warming….

    Atomic Bomb Explosion – YouTube
    Video for atomic bomb explosion you tube▶ 0:38

  10. Nik 10

    This issue echoes the fate of Superman’s Krypton, in reverse. Whereas Jor-El was one man desperately imploring an ignorant governing body of their impending doom, we have virtually the entire scientific community of the world desperately imploring a 1% oligarchy of wilfully ignorant capitalists. Amounts to the same result.

  11. Wayne 11

    This whole thread seems to be premised on the current extremes, and implies they become the norm all of the summer, not just a week or so. And that winter basically vanishes. Yes, they are extreme, but they have all been experienced before within the last 100 hundred years, just not so close together. For instance the current UK summer is being compared to the summer of 1976. I was in the UK for that one. Hot but hardly extreme.

    Increases of 3 or 4 degrees in the next 30 years go way outside IPCC predictions. It implies the atmosphere and oceans retain heat at a level that is simply unparalleled. As I understand the science, CO2 levels would have to increase an enormous amount above the present for that to occur on a sustained basis.

    It is a bit like the movie “Day After Tomorrow”. There was simply no science based explanation that could account for the Atlantic cooling by six degrees in three days. OK, I know that was just a film, but extreme scenarios require an extreme level of evidence, not just someone saying “imagine if this happened, we will all die.”

    • Jenny 11.1

      Wayne, Do you deny that it will be bad?

      • corodale 11.1.1

        Bad is such a subjective term. Could we not break the trend and try some positive paraphasing? Like; “Wayne, Do you deny that it won’t be good?”

    • Dennis Frank 11.2

      Media are currently reporting that 1% increase has now happened. The IPCC has always been as conservative as possible. Neither does their estimate include the effect of tipping points. When complex systems get triggered into transition from one stable state to another, that transition is often swift, and those in Gaia would take everyone affected on a wild ride.

      The global climate change reporting in recent months has been composed of temperature records broken yet again, how many years in a row is that now? Plus storms, floods, fires etc more often than in past years. So people are learning empirically from the gathering evidence that the escalation is real.

      Hollywood did dramatise Day After Tomorrow too much: “a storm system develops in the northern hemisphere, splitting into three superstorms above Canada, Scotland, and Siberia. The gigantic “hurricanes” pull frozen air from the upper troposphere into their center, sending air temperature there below -150 degrees Fahrenheit. The subzero temperatures of the superstorms’ eyes cause flash freezing.”

      A theory that has yet to be validated by real life. But we have seen the effect of two storms converging and combining in recent months, and we have see two wildfires combining to make a record-sized one this week in California.

    • Anne 11.3

      …they have all been experienced before within the last 100 hundred years, just not so close together.

      This is the key Wayne.

      It is the future whether we like it or not. These extremes by way of heatwaves and massive storms are going to become more and more frequent and hence they are going to occur closer together. It stands to reason when you take into account the global population explosion… the subsequent increase in industrial and other pollutants released into the atmosphere, and the wholesale destruction of massive swathes of forests which are known to help regulate the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

      The longer you Climate Change cynics (usually on the political right) keep your collective heads firmly ensconced in the sand, the less chance life on this planet as we know it will survive.

      And none of this is very far away.

    • Pat 11.4

      “Various politicians, fossil-fuel interest groups, and commentators have seized on the uncertainty inherent in climate models as reasons to doubt the dangers of climate change, or to argue against strong policy and mitigation responses”

      https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609620/global-warmings-worst-case-projections-look-increasingly-likely/

    • Bill 11.5

      Yes, they are extreme, but they have all been experienced before within the last 100 hundred years, just not so close together. For instance the current UK summer is being compared to the summer of 1976. I was in the UK for that one. Hot but hardly extreme.

      Are you innocently and/or stupidly missing out the bit about those extremes being splattered across the entire fcking hemisphere there Wayne?

      Increases of 3 or 4 degrees in the next 30 years go way outside IPCC predictions.

      Current CO2 levels equate to temperature much higher than today (optimistically about 2 or 3 degrees above pre-industrial). Easy to understand chart here. (Current CO2 levels are north of 400ppm – about 410 and climbing)

      I’m curious about these “predictions” of the IPCC you mention.

      You’re aware (surely, from having been a prominent politician!) that the so-called “extreme” IPCC pathway is the “business as usual” pathway and that (obviously enough) is precisely the pathway that we’re on, yes? And you’re also aware (for the same reasons as above) that politicians and policy advisers wank the fuck on about the 2 degree pathway in public knowing (or they should) that that pathway is rammed chock full of models that can only get to 2 degrees by assuming an improbable amount of negative emissions technology (that doesn’t currently exist) being rolled out all across the world in a decade or two from now?

      Actually, no matter how you want to cut it, (ie, your positioning on all of the above) it appears you’re just yet another fine example of why politicians and the institutions they crawl their way up through need to be jettisoned.

    • Tricledrown 11.6

      Wayne cherry picking one year.
      So how come we have had 14 of the hottest years on record since 1998.
      And your own govts ice core drilling on the Antarctic shows that every other time in history show dramatic climate change occurs when CO² reaches levels close to what they are now.

  12. I’ve got it!

    If we really want to cut back our CO2 emissions, – we need to cut down all the trees!

    Right!, – fetch those chainsaws and lets get working !!! Sorry Shane, put a stop press on that tree planting scheme,- they’ll be the death of us all !

    • corodale 12.1

      Yes! Less trees, more grass. Grazing makes compost, compost supports organic agriculture. Don’t panic, go organic!

  13. corodale 13

    The UN needs more power, so they can have us all sterilised? Is that the drift of this fear porn?

    Or more seriously, how about NZ cuts oil consumption in half, in anticipation of disruption to global shipping, while BRICS-Plus take military occupation of the Middle East? NZ remains neutral, and we watch on with sorrow in our hearts as Australia spills their guts over the Persian Gulf.

    Quantitative easing collapses under the new global alignments, the stock market crashes and 90% of big business goes bankrupt. The central banks of national states then buy the assets they wish to keep, using commodity weighted currencies under BRICS banking leadership.

    The US and UK can make themselves great again, by independently keeping out of it.

    • corodale 13.1

      But how can we stop global warming?
      Well, transparency would be a start.

      As my climatology lecturer once said. “Over the last century, photo chemical smog has actually blocked out approximately the same amount of heat, at the GHGs have trapped.”

      He wasn’t suggesting that there is no global warming, but certainly wasn’t suggesting the situation was hopeless.

      Pollution (photo-chemical) could well save us. Yeah, geo-engineering (the search engine here calms there is no such word). Which might explain why Western Europe has been sprayed for many years now, with fuel dumping from air traffic. If the results of such experiments where made public, then we wouldn’t have to cry “fear porn!”, at OP articles like this one above.

      West coast surfers north and south of AKL will be able to confirm, the condensation trails have become irregular, often persistent. It’s not rocket science or fake news, its just having ya eyes open, dear people.

      • joe90 13.1.1

        I’ve spent most of my life living and surfing on the West coast and other than the rising, but weirdly fluctuating water temperatures, nothing much has changed.

        • corodale 13.1.1.1

          Seriously? North or south of AKL? I was chatting with surfer (who half saved me at Port Waikato), and he thought the new clouds where strange. A local farm and I both noted a very thick condensation trail that ran west-east over Bombay oneday, just last summer.

          • cleangreen 13.1.1.1.1

            Coridale;

            I saw these same strange clouds in Napier last sumer late in the season too with trails also. .

        • corodale 13.1.1.2

          If I remember correctly, a Labour MP raised this issue in NZ parliament a few years ago. It’s certainly been an issue at the UN parliament.

          Some strange spin on the subject. This German article talks of only fuel dumping in emergency. Opening our minds for the full truth though
          https://www.deutschlandfunknova.de/beitrag/fuel-dumping-wenn-flugzeuge-kerosin-ablassen

          I would assume they are using similar tech, to the AdBlue with we have on our european diesel car and tractors. In our glasshouse we spray a lime on the roof, to reduce the sun intensity, it washes off in the autumn. Our farm also sprays silica over corps, a few times per year, but for slightly different reasons. What the UN could do with their Paris deal budget, the mind boggles. I read in a German “Tax Payers Magazine” that Germany have more than doubled they contributions to Paris deal, by borrowing billions from banks. Where did all the money go? I don’t know either.

          Don’t panic, go organic!

      • corodale 13.1.2

        slight correction: search engine = spell check
        both geo-engineering and geo-politics aren’t recognised by spell-check, though I’ll forgive them for not approving the word bankster, the term babylonian-banker is a bit longer, but it cuts deeper to the truth.

      • One Two 13.1.3

        The sky has changed… more accurately, the sky has been changed…

        The only debateable point is how the sky has been changed….

        The changes are mirrored around the globe…

    • corodale 14.1

      So, he admits that scientist are politically bias, Conservatives!
      More indigenous food in the UK? You can’t eat the Celtic!
      Oh, I can listen no more,… I got to (work?) pick-up sacks full of left-over organic-bread from the windmill in the local village. Along with a bit of milk from the cows, and wind-fall apples. Oh, the pigs here eat better than the average Kiwi. No wander you lot are so down in the dumps about everything.

      Don’t panic, go organic!

      • Pat 14.1.1

        how well does your organic garden grow in 50 deg.C?….and how well does it cope with torrential rain?…and drought?….and extreme wind?

        • corodale 14.1.1.1

          Better than the convi-neighbours. We do have ground water here (close to the Rhine, farming on the trenches from the wars). Cost diesel and electricity for the pumps, but the yields are all good, despite 4 months without rain.

          More ethical flow of funds. Shorter, resilient supply chains. Lower emissions, soil development, higher value addition and health, both human and ecological.
          Community interactive, at the small farm shop, plus kindergarden visits, school student practicals, organic polytec visits, university research, work programmes with eastern european students (mainly Russian speaking Muslims), and a model farm with the agricultural chambers. Organics fills the niche.

          Don’t panic, go organic!

  14. sumsuch 15

    Comments here are the scientific dissection of every detail. Thankee on that.

    The media is turned to pleasing it’s pleasure-riddled customers so there is no chance of the concentration on this danger it requires. There’s no hope but hope now.

  15. R.P Mcmurphy 16

    an experiment done in the 1950’s released a herd of red deer on an island in Vancouver Sound.
    The population exploded exponentially and then disease and inbreeding decimated the herd.
    It never recovered its previous health and vitality.

  16. Bill 17

    Maybe this is a small part of what happens now?

    Masked young people in Sweden have set fire to dozens of cars and thrown rocks at police, prompting the prime minister to ask: “What the heck are you doing?”

    A police spokesman, Hans Lippens, said initial reports indicated that about 80 cars were set alight overnight, chiefly in Gothenburg, the country’s second largest city, and nearby Trollhättan. Fires were also reported on a smaller scale in Malmö in the south.

  17. Pat 18

    “A 200-metre section of the Morandi Bridge on the A10 motorway came down in an industrial area of the port city during a sudden and violent storm, trapping cars and trucks under the rubble, the private broadcaster Sky TG24 reported.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/14/genoa-motorway-bridge-collapses-italy

    • Tricledrown 18.1

      Pat Italy the land of Mafia I would suspect shortcuts taken.
      Knowing Italian infrastructure maintenence.

      • Exkiwiforces 18.1.1

        You forgot planning as well and dodgie Italian pollies at all levels unfortunately.

      • Pat 18.1.2

        yes, its entirely possible and it may have no connection whatsoever to CC…..but failing infrastructure simply compounds the problems esp. in a resource challenged world whatever the reason(s)

  18. Exkiwiforces 19

    Found this rather interesting article on the ABC News website:

    It explains the current weather patterns here in Oz and also has some interesting maps/ pictures with little old NZ in it.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-14/southern-annular-mode-and-how-it-affects-our-weather/10106134

  19. Jenny 20

    In an ironic way, the more primitive societies may last the longest. Man resident in the great conurbations will perhaps feel the impacts first and more extremely.

    Personally I doubt it.

    It is the poorest and least developed nations, those also least responsible for creating climate change, that are getting hardest hit by climate change.

    Puerto Rico

    Marshall Islands

    Even in the developed countries the poorest are the hardest hit.

    And where will all the refugees from all these climate disasters go?

    Where they have always traditionally headed in time of war and disaster, to the great metropolitan nations and cities.

    What would such ciities look like?

    Vastly overcrowded for sure, because they will be seen as a safe haven from the ravages of nature.
    Already, some first world cities with the resources to do it, are hardening themselves against the effects of climate change, with sea walls and dikes and barriers. These defences will only grow bigger and more formidable as the seas rise and the storms grow worse, until at last the remaining cities start to resemble huge and uglier versions of medieval fortresses. That is until the food runs out as the outlying agricultural hinterland is destroyed.. Even then, it is possible that cities could learn to grow their own food. And this might not be by choice but by necessity, as agriculture as we know it today, will no longer be viable, devastated by floods, drought, and super storms.

    Jut like the Mega Cities of the Ravaged Earth in the Judge Dredd comics.

  20. Sabine 21

    what happens now?

    the very poor will die first,
    the somewhat poor will die next
    the not so poor will die soon after
    followed by the now not rich anymore

    the world will see numbers of refugees that will make the last few years a cake walk.
    And the well of nations can build walls, and those driven from their lands due to floods, droughts, fires, crop failures etc will climb those walls and dig underneath.

    not sure if all of that will come to end by 2050, but i am sure that we are already in the middle of it.

    good fun, buckle up Ladies and Gents, its gonna be a bumpy ride.

  21. johnm 22

    My first question: What is the single most serious threat to the planet?

    Without hesitation, Dr. Wadhams explained: A sudden and huge pulse of methane out of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf originating from its extraordinarily shallow waters <50 meters, or a similar burst out of the Laptev Sea, where 53% of the seawater rests on continental shelf averaging depth of <50 meters.

    Those extraordinarily shallow waters expose vulnerability to global warming over miles upon miles of methane concentration, hydrates as well as free gas, believed to be the world’s largest. The vulnerability relates to methane in sediments capped by layers of permafrost left over from the last Ice Age.

    The dilemma is: The permafrost cap is rapidly thawing as a result of anomalous retreat of summer sea ice.

    My follow up question: What will be the impact of a 50Gt pulse?

    Answer: “It would wipe out civilization within 5 years.”
    https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/08/10/peter-wadhams-professor-emeritus-ocean-physics/

    Climate Change is going exponential plus humans are destroying the biosphere.We need Habitat Habitat Habitat to survive otherwise we go extinct, one reason we can't grow grains.

    " The Great Dying wiped out at least 90% of the species on Earth due to an abrupt rise in global–average temperature about 252 million years ago. The vast majority majority of complex life became extinct. based on information from the most conservative sources available, Earth is headed for a similar or higher global-average temperature in the very near future. The recent and near-future rises in temperature are occurring and will occur at least an order of magnitude faster than the worst of all prior Mass Extinctions. Habitat for human animals is disappearing throughout the world, and abrupt climate change has barely begun. In the near future, habitat for Homo Sapiens will be gone. Shortly thereafter, all humans will die.
    There is no precedence in planetary history for events unfolding today. For example, the near-term ice-free Arctic will represent the first such event with humans on Earth. As a result, relying on prior events to predict the near future is unwise.
    This presentation describes self-reinforcing feedback loops ( i.e. "positive feedbacks") and other contributors to the on going and near-future global-average temperature rise. The combination of these factors indicates Homo Sapiens will join prior species of humans and myriad other organisms in the void of extinction. " GM Extinction seems a certainty to me.All species eventually go extinct. However time will tell, we can but wait and see who is right and who is wrong. If, IF GM is right we have under 10 years left.

    • johnm 22.1

      More evidence Climate Change has gone exponential. Rignot explains that the Marinelli Glacier in Tierra del Fuego its melt rate has gone from ” 55mph to 550mpg” Also it’s just a matter of some time before the West Antarctic Ice Sheet goes. This is a holy shit!! moment the interviewer exclaims. Rignot responds: it’s worse than holy shit we’re not prepared.

      UC Irvine professor Eric Rignot is featured in this Emmy-winning HBO series VICE where he discusses his findings of Antarctica’s melting ice sheets and the global impact of sea level rise. He told VICE founder and producer Shane Smith that glaciers in West Antarctica’s Amundsen Sea have “passed the point of no return” and their disappearance could trigger the collapse of the entire West Antarctic ice sheet, which could raise global sea levels by up to five meters – or 15 feet. Such an event could severely submerge the world’s heavily populated coastal areas, and force us to redraw the world map as we know it.

  22. johnm 23

    For the people who don’t like Guy McPherson and consider him a fake and a flake. This video shows him accused of being a grifter and a conman!to his face. How will he react!? How will the audience react? Will some heavies eject this rude person? Enjoy! 🙂

    Edge of Extinction: Ashland, WI, Q & A Preview

  23. Lebleaux 24

    Interesting thread.

    I think the other thing we have to do is find a way to evolve past the need for religion. At the highest level religions generally teach us that we are not part of the earth, that we are created, that we have a soul and a soul is eternal and you need one to ascend after your death. There is also a view expressed in many parts of the christian book that the other living things on the planet are there for our use and pleasure. While we continue in this mode large parts of us will never understand that we are actually just another product of the planet and as such are tightly bound to its fate.

    Thoughts?

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Membership: Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board
    The Governments of Australia and New Zealand have announced the membership of the Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board (ANZEIB) today. This is an important step towards implementing e-Invoicing across both countries to help businesses save time and money ...
    1 week ago
  • An end to unnecessary secondary tax
    Workers who are paying too much tax because of incorrect secondary tax codes are in line for relief with the passage of legislation through Parliament late last night. The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19, Modernising Tax Administration, and Remedial Matters) ...
    1 week ago
  • Chatham Islands pāua plan approved
    Efforts to reverse the decline in the Chatham Islands pāua fishery are the focus of a new plan jointly agreed between government, the local community and industry. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash says the plan was developed by the PauaMAC4 Industry ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Bill introduced for synthetics crackdown
    The Police will get stronger powers of search and seizure to crackdown on synthetic drugs under new legislation, which makes the two main synthetics (5F-ADB and AMB-FUBINACA) Class A drugs. The Government has today introduced the Misuse of Drugs Amendment ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Blasphemous libel law repealed
    The archaic blasphemous libel offence will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill today, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Coalition Government lassos livestock rustling
    New rules to crack down on livestock rustling will come into force following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Medieval law axed
    The ‘year and a day rule’ rule will be repealed following the passing of the Crimes Amendment Bill, says Justice Minister Andrew Little. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Further steps to combat tax evasion
    Further steps to combat tax evasion Revenue Minister Stuart Nash has announced New Zealand is expanding its global ability to combat tax evasion by joining forces with authorities in 30 countries and jurisdictions. Cabinet has agreed to add another ...
    3 weeks ago