[Discussion] Climate Change

This thread is just to post interesting news, thoughts, opinions about climate change.

Well, the sort-of-good-news is that even the rosiest estimates have the effects of E.O. attempting to repeal the Clean Power Plan to be somewhat mitigated by coal's continued decline:
IMAGE(https://cdn0.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/7MG57_X8zoh8ESV1lmQbFu5WMzk=/600x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn0.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8015645/Screen_Shot_2017_02_20_at_3.15.03_PM.png)
Oh, and even with this Appalachia doesn't get new coal jobs.

(And, according to the figures I found, there are 137,133 solar installers and growing, versus about 50,000 and shrinking coal miners.)

Solar and wind are already dropping to competitive prices and states are anticipating that future administrations may go back to stricter standards, so it's a slowdown of clean energy, not an end. Which is still bad news, but it's not as bad as it could be.

As a follow-up to the above about the new EO.

"My action today is latest in steps to grow American jobs," Trump added, saying his order is "ending the theft of prosperity."
,,,
"It is an issue that deserves attention," the official said of climate change. "But I think the President has been very clear that he is not going to pursue climate change policies that put the US economy at risk. It is very simple."
...
"The previous administration devalued workers by their policies," the official said. "We are saying we can do both. We can protect the environment and provide people with work."
The White House official went on to argue that the best way to protect the environment is to have a strong economy, noting that countries like India and China do less to protect the environment.

...
This executive order is also an attempt by the Trump administration to make good on its promise to bring more coal jobs back. The official said that Obama's regulations "were not helpful" to the coal industry and these reversals are the President honoring "a pledge he made to the coal industry."
"We are going to put our coal miners back to work," Trump said at a March 2017 event in Kentucky. "They have not been treated well, but they're going to be treated well now."
He added: "The miners are coming back."
On Tuesday at the EPA, Trump welcomed a group of miners that attended the signing and said the order was "putting an end to the war on coal."
...
Robert Murray, the CEO of Murray Energy, told CNN in January that coal employment "can't be brought back to where it was before the election of Barack Obama" because of market pressure.

So, for some highlights we're saying jobs over environment, that's the epitome of short-sightedness. We're also saying we are still doing great because China and India are worse at protecting the environment. That's the good ol' US of A attitude! "We're not the worst!" Gone are the days of trying to at least pretend we're going to lead the world in a better direction. Now as long as we're not dead last we're A-OK. And trying to have clean air and prevent an epidemic of asthma and other chronic respiratory conditions by regulating coal-fire plants was a bad thing because some miners lost their jobs? That's a trade I'm willing to make. People lose jobs as their roles become outdated, automated, or unwanted. An economy should adapt to that, not try to turn back the clock.

someone posted an image from this in the p&c image thread, not sure if it's also been mentioned in here yet;

Photos Reveal More Than 200 Bright Blue Arctic Lakes Have Started Bubbling With Methane Gas
Not good

Very very not good, we're so f*cked :/

methane is roughly 30 times more potent than CO2 as a heat-trapping gas

so as the POTUS vows to bring back coal jobs and slashes at the EPA we may already be passed the tipping point for Earth.

krev82 wrote:

someone posted an image from this in the p&c image thread, not sure if it's also been mentioned in here yet;

Photos Reveal More Than 200 Bright Blue Arctic Lakes Have Started Bubbling With Methane Gas
Not good

Very very not good, we're so f*cked :/

methane is roughly 30 times more potent than CO2 as a heat-trapping gas

Yeah, scientists in the know about permafrost and suboceanic deposits have been warning about the potential 'carbon bomb' from methane hydrates for a couple of decades. It's actually some pretty serious stuff, and worse, it's not something we can do much about. What I gather from that article is that these particular emissions are only peripherally (if at all) driven by climate change, but that doesn't change their ability to drive additional climate change.

Incidentally, I've noticed a rash of terribly-done science journalism on this and related topics in the past month or so. This one is pretty good (it does go off the rails a bit in the last third or so), but there's been some really misleading stuff about methane and permafrost in Siberia coming across my newsfeed lately...

krev82 wrote:

so as the POTUS vows to bring back coal jobs and slashes at the EPA we may already be passed the tipping point for Earth.

Not defending these slashes or the Republican's goals for the EPA, but one country will never tip the scale one way or the other on this issue (unless we start polluting at a scale orders of magnitude higher then other top polluting countries). I doubt if the US doubles it's emissions that it alone can cause the end of the world, or if it reduces it's emissions to zero it won't save the world. It has to be a global effort. That said, we aren't helping.

kazar wrote:

I doubt if the US doubles it's emissions that it alone can cause the end of the world, or if it reduces it's emissions to zero it won't save the world. It has to be a global effort.

I totally agree that there must be a global effort, but thinking that the US can't make a difference helps to ensure that there will never be a solution. The US contribution to global carbon emissions is big - really big - second only to China, about double the next largest polluter, and about one seventh of world emissions. While it may be true that the US can't fix things on its own, it can certainly scuttle any cooperative efforts on its own. One country can definitely tip the scale, when it's an emissions behemoth. US emissions are large enough to cause problems, even if everyone else manages to reduce theirs. Moreover, if the US doesn't play nice, it's a disincentive for everyone else to do so. Climate policies of the US have a profound effect on the rest of the world.

The atmosphere is a commons, and as long as we continue to function as individuals it will be subject to the tragedy of the commons. Depressing stuff.

When everyone is standing around saying "I'll do it when everyone else does it first." nothing gets done. This is why it's a big deal that the US is stepping away from every major initiative to curb pollution. To reach the global solution level everyone has to be on board so "just one" major country not caring about global warming is a big deal. Just as the US said "but China and India...!" now other nations can say "But the US...!".

I believe that is what one guy in Russia hopes that bringing back the mammoth will do. they can consume vegetation fast enough such that the land freezes easier and quicker, thus attempting to prevent more permafrost from melting.

We did an experiment with trimming the grasses from a small area in the Canadian Arctic and it did enhance heat removal in winter, so that part of the premise is sound. Cloning mammoths and setting them loose is, of course, an absolutely wild idea, especially during a period of climate change. That said, Sergei Zimov is a good scientist with some crazy ideas - I genuinely wouldn't put cloning mammoths past him.

fangblackbone wrote:

prevent more permafrost from melting.

Also, as a general note, it makes me cringe every time I see a news article that talks about permafrost melting. Permafrost doesn't melt; it thaws. It is analogous to taking a chicken breast out of the freezer - the water in it melts, but the item itself thaws.

fangblackbone wrote:

I believe that is what one guy in Russia hopes that bringing back the mammoth will do. they can consume vegetation fast enough such that the land freezes easier and quicker, thus attempting to prevent more permafrost from melting.

Uh huh. Sure. That may be what he's telling everyone. Hell, he may have even convinced himself. But c'mon. He really just wants to bring them back because he thinks mammoths are cool.

Which... I can't really disagree.

Exxon-Mobil advises Trump not to abandon the Paris Treaty. Can't make this stuff up, folks.

CNN wrote:

Exxon has a complex and controversial history with climate change. The energy giant is being investigated for allegedly misleading the public and shareholders about what it knew about the dangers of climate change.

But in 2007 Exxon admitted publicly that climate change poses risks and said it's responsible to begin working on ways to reduce emissions.

Exxon has also been a consistent public supporter of the Paris agreement.

"We welcomed the Paris Agreement when it was announced in December 2015, and again when it came into force in November 2016. We have reiterated our support on several occasions," Peter Trelenberg, Exxon's environmental policy and planning manager, wrote to the White House.

Last month Exxon CEO Darren Woods, who replaced Rex Tillerson when he left to become Trump's secretary of state, wrote a blog post saying the company is "encouraged" that the Paris agreement creates a framework for "all countries" to address rising emissions.

Exxon noted in its letter to the White House that unlike the Kyoto Agreement, the Paris deal is the first major international accord to feature pledges from developed nations like the U.S. and developing ones like China. Exxon pointed out that China is the world's leading greenhouse gas emitted and India is likely to pass the U.S. as No. 2 before mid-century.

Exxon should have Wayne Tracker contact John Barron at the White House and let those two hash things out.

Robear wrote:

Exxon-Mobil advises Trump not to abandon the Paris Treaty. Can't make this stuff up, folks.

Exxon-Mobil knows that in the Mad Max future we are running toward, no one is buying gas anymore. They're stealing and murdering for it. That cuts into profits.

Mixolyde wrote:
Robear wrote:

Exxon-Mobil advises Trump not to abandon the Paris Treaty. Can't make this stuff up, folks.

Exxon-Mobil knows that in the Mad Max future we are running toward, no one is buying gas anymore. They're stealing and murdering for it. That cuts into profits.

JUST WALK AWAY

Mixolyde wrote:
Robear wrote:

Exxon-Mobil advises Trump not to abandon the Paris Treaty. Can't make this stuff up, folks.

Exxon-Mobil knows that in the Mad Max future we are running toward, no one is buying gas anymore. They're stealing and murdering for it. That cuts into profits.

Or perhaps something a little less apocalyptic like they see themselves making a substantial amount of money off natural gas replacing coal in the near term.

Wait, wait - there might be a way companies can make money even if their current business plan changes?

Holy crap! Someone should really let Republican voters know that everything doesn't have to be like it was when they were growing up to work.

Nah, that's political suicide in the US, farley3k, what with 90% of our jobs being in or dependent upon the coal industry. (According to Republicans, this election cycle, anyway; I remember in the 2000's it was Real Estate, and in the 90's it was steel mills, and in the 80's it was small farmers and TV evangelists...).

But an outside observer would conclude that it's the financial industry that Republicans *really* care about.

Robear wrote:

Nah, that's political suicide in the US, farley3k, what with 90% of our jobs being in or dependent upon the coal industry. (According to Republicans, this election cycle, anyway; I remember in the 2000's it was Real Estate, and in the 90's it was steel mills, and in the 80's it was small farmers and TV evangelists...).

But an outside observer would conclude that it's the financial industry that Republicans *really* care about.

The 2020s will probably be about the truck driver jobs that will be going away with autonomous vehicles. Public transportation jobs may be lost, too, but no one will care about those jobs. Public transportation is for /other/ people, and you wouldn't need it if you weren't a poor.
Truck Drivers are a masculine, folksy, American job. Those are important.

Robear wrote:

Nah, that's political suicide in the US, farley3k, what with 90% of our jobs being in or dependent upon the coal industry. (According to Republicans, this election cycle, anyway; I remember in the 2000's it was Real Estate, and in the 90's it was steel mills, and in the 80's it was small farmers and TV evangelists...).

But an outside observer would conclude that it's the financial industry that Republicans *really* care about.

For that matter it's what the Democrats care about as well, unfortunately.

You'd think so, Mixolyde, but right now, no one is really worried about cab drivers, and they are taking the brunt of the first wave of disruption, from both Uber/Lyft (automated cab calling systems with low paid drivers who don't have to put skin in the game) and automated cars. That does not bode well for truck drivers, bus drivers, driver ed instructors, or police budgets across the country. (When all the cars magically obey the speed limit and don't run lights, where will police get their budgets from?)

Robear wrote:

You'd think so, Mixolyde, but right now, no one is really worried about cab drivers, and they are taking the brunt of the first wave of disruption, from both Uber/Lyft (automated cab calling systems with low paid drivers who don't have to put skin in the game) and automated cars. That does not bode well for truck drivers, bus drivers, driver ed instructors, or police budgets across the country. (When all the cars magically obey the speed limit and don't run lights, where will police get their budgets from?)

Not to mention combining that with legalized MJ. And if you have self driving cars they may not need curbside parking the way we have now further reducing money coming to cities from parking meters.

Eventually, why own a car? Why not just call one up for a specified period of time and pay just for that usage? We'd see a *huge* reduction in cars on the road, especially if ride sharing was an option.

And that ripples out to automakers, and hundreds of thousands of small business jobs, and tax policies, and ...

Robear wrote:

You'd think so, Mixolyde, but right now, no one is really worried about cab drivers, and they are taking the brunt of the first wave of disruption, from both Uber/Lyft (automated cab calling systems with low paid drivers who don't have to put skin in the game) and automated cars. That does not bode well for truck drivers, bus drivers, driver ed instructors, or police budgets across the country. (When all the cars magically obey the speed limit and don't run lights, where will police get their budgets from?)

The stereotypical image of cab drivers is recent immigrants with darker skin and strong accents. The stereotypical image of truckers is tough white guys. I imagine that the second category will get far, far more attention from DC. I'm not saying that that's because of embedded racism, but it is 115% because of embedded racism.

Ok, it's also partially because taxi drivers are a thing that cities have, and f*ck cities and their non-American ways.

Robear wrote:

Eventually, why own a car? Why not just call one up for a specified period of time and pay just for that usage? We'd see a *huge* reduction in cars on the road, especially if ride sharing was an option.

And that ripples out to automakers, and hundreds of thousands of small business jobs, and tax policies, and ...

I envision that you'll sign up for commuter packages that will have plans that look a little like this:

Morning Time Allotment:
6:00 - 6:30, $10 a week
6:30 - 7:00, $15 a week
7:00 - 7:30, $20 a week
7:30 - 8:00, $25 a week
8:00 - 8:30, $30 a week
8:30 - 9:00, $30 a week
9:00 - 9:30, $20 a week
9:30 - 10:00, $15 a week

With a similar choice for the afternoon commute, and then some sort of "weekend/evening" minutes thing in addition to that. That will let the providers stagger their fleet a bit better so that their peak usage isn't too much ridiculously higher than the rest of the commute, and as the fraction of commuters using plans like this increases it will help spread out traffic a bit more as well.

I also wonder if it is possible we may temporarily see the resurgence of the company car, where larger companies buy out a few cars for the full commuter block, and then their employees schedule out their usage in-house.

Robear wrote:

Uber/Lyft (automated cab calling systems with low paid drivers who don't have to put skin in the game) and automated cars.

Oh, it's worse than that: because the rideshare-app companies have minimum standards for the cars their drivers can use (probably a good idea, in principle) and because many people don't have cars that meet it, they have a financing program to help their drivers get new cars. So the drivers are on the hook for the cars (but not, of course, the app company). Not that they'll get much more attention than they already have, because those people are, by definition, poor.

Uber's goal has pretty obviously always been to economically destroy all other forms of transportation so that they can finally jack their prices high enough to be profitable.

Antarctic Ice Reveals Earth’s Accelerating Plant Growth

If the plants can save us from ourselves, I for one welcome our new arboreous overlords. All hail Xyla! Hail Phloa!

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/2Zn496v.png)

Robear wrote:

You'd think so, Mixolyde, but right now, no one is really worried about cab drivers, and they are taking the brunt of the first wave of disruption, from both Uber/Lyft (automated cab calling systems with low paid drivers who don't have to put skin in the game) and automated cars. That does not bode well for truck drivers, bus drivers, driver ed instructors, or police budgets across the country. (When all the cars magically obey the speed limit and don't run lights, where will police get their budgets from?)

What Yonder said regarding cab drivers. Racism and anti-elitism.

Regarding police budgets, I expect increases in civil forfeiture and possibly intensifying the War on Drugs and the War on Immigrants.

The Japanese are now helping the Chinese fake climate change evidence!! (/s)

IMAGE(http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/1872-width/20170408_WOC411.png)