Global Warming - An Issue, Or Not?

[admin]

Originally Posted: 23 Apr 2008 03:23 pm
Transferred by Admin: 14/09/2009

You are welcome to post the following, edited version, in the appropriate place on your excellent new forum.

Let's start with the cliché which remains true, however many times it pops out. Climate change has been happening since the Earth formed and will go on happening until the Earth is swallowed up by the Sun as it turns into a red giant. The last million years has seen about 11 brief interglacials, some warmer than now but most of the time the Earth has been shrouded by cold. .

So I am neither "against" nor "for" GW; it happens. Lots of cleverer people than I think there is an anthropogenic component and many, also much cleverer people than I disagree. As regards Lord Stern, I guess he and I (and the unspeakable Al Gore) are equally ignorant of climate science.

However, it takes no genius to see that the current, quite disastrous increase in all fossil fuel prices, driven by peak oil that may be happening this year, is already causing massive food price inflation which unchecked, will soon cause mass starvation on a scale that we have not seen since the 1960s (when we were all anxious about the pending ice age - remember?). Food and fuel price inflation will affect more than twice as many of us as during the 1960s. The contribution of GW (or climate change) to run-away food price inflation today is negligible

"Fuel (and food) demand is all ready dropping among the 2 billion of us who very poor and for whom food and fuel is the most important part of their budget. The technical term for this is "demand destruction". But Global fuel demand continues to surge in OPEC and BRIC countries which will get richer as we, also in the West, get poorer.

What is clear is that the economic growth assumptions on which the IPCC and Stern models were based are being shredded. As a consequence of economic collapse, so CO2 emissions will slow down and start to shrink. It will take time but it will happen.

This time next year, it will be current food AND fuel security that will be pre-occupying us most. Not GW, anthropogenic or otherwise.

Regards, Hugh Sharman

[admin]

Originally Posted: 23 Apr 2008 05:39 pm by "theluckyman1976"

Ok so climate change, anthropogenic or otherwise, has always been with us. Sustainable energy - at least for me - is about building a coherent system that MAY be a bit more expensive than what we have or would have in the next few decades, but which then takes a lot of risk and uncertainty out of everyday life.

That's the main reason I'm not in favour of much in the way of new nuclear build. Global sustainability for nukes would mean tens of thousands of tonnes of 'dirty bomb' grade plutonium being produced each year. That and the ever spiraling costs of cleaning up the nukes we've already got...

[admin]

Originally Posted: 15 May 2008 11:04 am by "traamlink"

Dear All,

Climate change has of course taken place since our planet was formed as has been said. The case for the belief that humans have had an impact on this cycle is very strong.

The rate of change in the last 50 years has been very rapid and can almost certainly be attributed to our own actions.

Massive use of Carbon fuels and rapid de-forestation has lead to changes in climate.

We have to accept that the planet can not sustain a continued expansion of the population or it will result in shortages of energy and food.

This means that we will all need to live sustainable life styles based on our needs.

We have the means to phase out fossil fuels and to distribuit food to where it is required at reasonable cost.

If we start now we have a chance to ensure that the generations who follow will not call us some very bad names.

I have to agree that Nucular Power is not the answer due to the legercey of the waste that could be with many generations to come.

It is also another resource that will run out at some stage so we should be looking for answers that use resources that do not run out.
_________________
Clive H

[admin]

Originally Posted: 13 Sep 2008 06:51 am by "james wilkins"

Effects of global warming on the environment and human life are numerous, varied, accelerating and taking scientists studying global warming by surprise.

Scenarios studied by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predict that global warming will continue and get worse much faster than was expected even in their last report. The IPCC reports attribute many specific natural phenomena to human causes. The expected long range effects of recent climate change may already be observed. Raising sea levels, glacier retreat, Arctic shrinkage, and altered patterns of agriculture are cited as direct consequences of human activities. Predictions for secondary and regional effects include extreme weather events, an expansion of tropical diseases, changes in the timing of seasonal patterns in ecosystems, and drastic economic impact. Concerns have led to political activism advocating proposals to mitigate, eliminate, or adapt to it.

so i definitely say it is a issue.
---------------------
james wilkins

[luckyman]

Originally Posted by admin

Originally Posted: 23 Apr 2008 03:23 pm
Transferred by Admin: 14/09/2009

You are welcome to post the following, edited version, in the appropriate place on your excellent new forum.

Let's start with the cliché which remains true, however many times it pops out. Climate change has been happening since the Earth formed and will go on happening until the Earth is swallowed up by the Sun as it turns into a red giant. The last million years has seen about 11 brief interglacials, some warmer than now but most of the time the Earth has been shrouded by cold. .

So I am neither "against" nor "for" GW; it happens. Lots of cleverer people than I think there is an anthropogenic component and many, also much cleverer people than I disagree. As regards Lord Stern, I guess he and I (and the unspeakable Al Gore) are equally ignorant of climate science.

However, it takes no genius to see that the current, quite disastrous increase in all fossil fuel prices, driven by peak oil that may be happening this year, is already causing massive food price inflation which unchecked, will soon cause mass starvation on a scale that we have not seen since the 1960s (when we were all anxious about the pending ice age - remember?). Food and fuel price inflation will affect more than twice as many of us as during the 1960s. The contribution of GW (or climate change) to run-away food price inflation today is negligible

"Fuel (and food) demand is all ready dropping among the 2 billion of us who very poor and for whom food and fuel is the most important part of their budget. The technical term for this is "demand destruction". But Global fuel demand continues to surge in OPEC and BRIC countries which will get richer as we, also in the West, get poorer.

What is clear is that the economic growth assumptions on which the IPCC and Stern models were based are being shredded. As a consequence of economic collapse, so CO2 emissions will slow down and start to shrink. It will take time but it will happen.

This time next year, it will be current food AND fuel security that will be pre-occupying us most. Not GW, anthropogenic or otherwise.

Regards, Hugh Sharman

While I wouldn't refer to Al Gore as unspeakable, I thought that this was well worth repeating on the forum. While Hugh is ambivalent, personally I do believe the balance of evidence suggests that anthropogenic factors have affected climate. Most of the world's 'chattering classes' (as I believe Hugh refers to them) won't be giving a fig for anthropogenic climate change, since to most of them doing something about it merely means replacing their (insert premium car brand) with a more efficient model, and at that only because the car maker has been forced to make it more efficient. Which they - the chatterers - can't now do. Swings (climate change) and roundabouts (demand destruction in consumerism and consumption of oil and related products). However this is, or at least we keep getting told it's going to be, a blip.

The planet's climate may or may not decide to kill us all off. What I would remind everyone of is the fact that global population is now well over six billion, and I believe we are all agreed that we came very close to peak fossil extraction rates before the credit crunch. When the demand destruction of the present recession ends, we could be in very deep strife.

For more joy to brighten up your Tuesday, could someone(s) please have a quick read/skim through http://www.deasil.co.uk/diggingforfossils.html , which is one of the information pages on my own site, and let me know if you think any part of it is rubbish please? (Tone, content, accuracy etc.)

George

[clivehinchcliffe]

Dear All,

It would be nice to know if CO2 has reduced and by how much since the credit crunch?

Perhaps this has given us a few more years to get our act in to gear or has it.

We have the technologies and the abilities to solve both this issue and that of energy and food supply.

The one thing that is always the catch 22 is Money and Cost and who will pay.

Write to your MP and locale Councilor ask them what their position is on the 4 main issues of the day.

Energy, Food, Global Warming and Finance.

Then vote for the best option.