From Prof. Eliot Jacobson:
Wow! Wow! Wow!
North Atlantic sea surface temperature anomalies are going vertical again. And yes, I needed to extend the y-axis.
Yesterday’s temperature of 24.49°C (76.08°F) was 4.2σ above the 1991-2020 mean. The previous high for July 17 was 23.71°C (74.68°F) in 2020.
https://twitter.com/EliotJacobson/status/1681321023306874880
We are so fucked
Yep, but for a shining moment in time, humanity created a lot of value for shareholders!
Those are the only important people in the world.
Far worse than that. Significant shareholders, not someone’s paltry 401k, but people who hoard millions upon millions+ are the only people the owner class considers to be people at all.
We aren’t people to our owners, we are livestock meant to be exploited for all the value we can produce, and then tossed away like the useless garbage we are to them despite being the ones that generate their wealth. Remembering or honoring that fact would interfere with their self-delusions of being “self-made.” We aren’t human to them, which makes it easier to do what they do to us.
Thats why they go to such extraordinary lengths to segregate themselves from us. They send their children to private schools for rich kids who teach them they will be the future leaders of the world and the most altruistic thing they can do is increase their own net worth, while never exposing them to social interaction with peasant children, to ensure they don’t develop empathy with us or humanize us peasants, which would have to happen at a young age while worldviews are forming. A handful overcome this, but almost all of them embrace it. Most of the wealth class actively creates walls to avoid interacting with the cattle.
It doesn’t feel nearly as cruel if you perceive those being paid almost nothing in sweatshops to manufacture the crap you make for private profit to be mindless beasts.
Foreplay’s over.
Line go up!
Capitalism is working! Line go up!
This isn’t the free market we imagined… it’s unregulated capitalism, to the point that smaller eco-friendly companies can’t compete. At this point the market isn’t free anymore.
It works as intended for the guys who own the politicians so its not getting fixed.
George Washington was one of the richest men in the world. What do you think he was imagining exactly?
What sort of stupid comment is this blaming George fucking Washington?
He was the first US president and paved the way for the writing of the constitution, which is the basis of how the wests entire capitalist structure (and due to US controlled international hegemony, the world). Does that clear it up a bit for you where my point is? I can explain it further if you want. It’s not the only factor, but when people say “this isn’t the free market capitalism that was intended!” I tend to roll my eyes.
I tend to roll my eyes when people think any one man is responsible for setting up the entire Western capitalist structure. I don’t actually think that’s what you’re saying, but it’s important to note that George Washington may have been the final decider, but had otherwise little to do with forming and reforming the policies that make up the capitalist structure as we know it today. It’s extremely lazy to try and blame it on any one person.
Yeah that’s not what I was trying to do dude lol
The intent is to blame the Founders, and they all were rich slave owners and businessmen. The entire American revolution was reactionary. This is what they wanted.
He was also worth the equivalent of half a billion dollars.
It never was. Remember, capitalism has to be regulated to work. Adam Smith even said so. Looking at you ancaps and libertarians.
According to Adam Smith, markets and trade are, in principle, good things—provided there is competition and a regulatory framework that prevents ruthless selfishness, greed and rapacity from leading to socially harmful outcomes.
Indeed. People almost invariably conflate capitalism with free markets, whereas those relatively independent properties.
Stonks 💪
We need an equivalent word for climate change where the line always goes up.
Honestly how long do we have until we experience massive fishing and crop failures everywhere?
We already are experiencing that. Crab fishing season was cancelled in 2022 due to a sudden “where are our missing billions of crab?” Other fishing areas are likewise being affected.
Massive crop failures in China, Russia, Middle East, Africa, south and Central America have been going on for several years. Potable water is disappearing in many regions, forcing massive water migration.
For those looking for a reference like I was:
https://www.themanual.com/food-and-drink/alaska-snow-crab-season-canceled/
Enjoy your days before. The working turn of phrase has consistently been, “Faster than expected.”
On a planetary scale, I don’t think we’re going to have trouble feeding ourselves, it’s just that a) meat is going to become thoroughly unaffordable and b) an awful lot of crop production is going to shift towards the poles, creating many a geopolitical clusterfuck along the way.
Disaster movies are too obvious, and too tidy; it’s going to be a century of the average human’s life getting just a bit more hellish every year. Acutely hellish for some, barely hellish at all for others, but basically, we’re going to slowly roll back most of the improvements in human welfare over the past few centuries until we’ve got starving serfs all over the place and plagues and famines and natural disasters absolutely flattening entire countries for years at a time.
This year isn’t great. Next year should be worse.
Very fucking soon.
You ever watch disaster movies? They’re only 2-2.5hrs average.
Well, imagine this is a movie. The 100+ years of data we ignored was that “secret file” that was just discovered. The new high temps are the geeky science guy yelling “oh shit!”
Remember what happens right after that? Very, very quick collapse. Food disaster, heat disaster, weather events and oxygen decrease in our atmosphere.
We’ll either starve, boil, suffocate or kill each other trying to survive.
I think it’s within a couple years. Not decades that is typically reported.
Couple years. We won’t get off that easy. This is sloooowww slide 🛝 with road rash and rug burns. It’ll be bad, then get better, then get worse, then get better, and then…
I don’t think so. We already had that. People just won’t acknowledge or recognize it. The cliché “end is nigh” coming right up.
We’d be better off if it toppled in a week. Then we’d have purpose in rebuilding. I hope you’re right.
Conservatives still wouldn’t allow us to act. We get to die like white Jesus intended. To conservatives, widespread death is all just part of the plan.
We’re all going to kill each other due to economic collapse and scarcity of resources long before anyone is being boiled alive.
So you are saying I can at least take comfort in a luke warm ocean as others attempt to kill me in the end of days?
Possibly. I think bad air/decreased oxygen will suffocate billions. Not much left to fight over.
Unless you renew your Premium Deluxe Air™ subscription. Oxygen As A Service.
Ha, I can’t afford it. Guess I’ll die blue.
Let’s start with the conservatives then. They are marbled and dumb, like cattle.
In no way, shape, or form is this good!
Well, it kind of is nice if you like to swim in the ocean and don’t like the cold? /s (in case)
Does that warm water get to come up to the northeast? /s
It takes about ~30 years to see the effects of emissions on the climate. That means the climate crisis we’re experiencing right now is only the emissions up to ~1993. Looking at CO2 emissions alone, in 1993 the global total was 22.8 billion tonnes. The latest Data available is from 2021, which shows the global CO2 emissions at 37.1 billion tonnes. That’s in increase of 14.3 billion tonnes of annual CO2 emissions in the amount of time it takes us to feel the effects, that’s a 61% increase in Annual emissions, Not Total emissions. If we stopped all CO2 emissions today, it would continue to get considerably worse for at least the next quarter-century. We are truly
Fuckedon the bleeding edge of that climate “tipping point” and major changes are about to start happening very rapidly.source for CO2 emissions numbers: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions
Where did you learn that CO2 emissions take 30 years to have an effect on our atmosphere?? I’ve never heard that.
30 years isn’t a hard number, but it can still take 2-3 decades. It has to do with how CO2 changes ocean chemistry, which has broad effects on the rest of the climate. https://info.ecogardens.com/blog/what-is-climate-change-lag-and-why-do-we-care
Edit: I think this is the first place i saw it years ago https://skepticalscience.com/Climate-Change-The-40-Year-Delay-Between-Cause-and-Effect.html
I imagine you noticed this but that second citation (from your edit) has this at the top of the article:
Update August 9, 2020: Please be aware that this article was published in 2010 and that its content is no longer considered accurate. As it still gets regularly linked to from other websites, we will not delete or “unpublish” it. Instead, here is the link to a better take on this topic published by our late team member Andy Skuce in 2013: Global Warming: Not Reversible but Stoppable.
Pretty major caveat:
This linear relationship isn’t determined by any physical properties of the climate system, and probably won’t hold in much warmer or cooler climates, nor when other feedback processes kick in.
The argument that all of this is based on is proposed by one researcher, and it boils down to climate sensitivity currently counteracting the effects of carbon sensitivity roughly equally. So we know that the furthest extent this buffering influence will have is until the ocean stops absorbing roughly 90% of extra heat, which hits its own limit when the poles reach heat of fusion (and the ice completes the phase change to water).
At this point the land starts experiencing heat increases directly. It is considered a tipping point that will send climate change’s impact to a new order of magnitude, essentially. And tipping points are hypothesized to tip like dominoes - leaving the new equilibrium exponentially far away from the old climate.
Polar ice studies have been pretty dire lately. You will get various estimates, but an ice free Antarctic is quickly approaching. Regional crises could be observed even next year due to local influences of El Niño weather patterns. There is very real potential for virtually ice free poles by 2035. The way things are going, it could occur before 2030.
So let’s take the follow discussion and it’s citation. Let’s go ahead and suppose that stopping emission increases will slow the rate of warming, and that going to zero emissions will halt warming but not reduce it. Let’s suppose not of the minor limitations and exceptions come into play, and just consider that warming curve. (This wasn’t even the point of the follow-up article, the point was that the social challenges are greater than the scientific ones).
Can we stop all emissions by 2030? Or even 2035? Do we ever see that happening? Not just emission increases, but emissions altogether?
Because if we don’t, the poles melt and a heat bomb goes off. Somewhere between now and that point, ocean life dies causing huge areas to go anoxic and turn toxic, and food pyramids collapse.
Meanwhile we don’t have any carbon capture methods that are even theoretically viable, and scientists are starting to warn that that CC solutions will not arrive in time to prevent a collapse of civilization.
Thanks for pointing out the follow-up. It and the other presentation are worth a read, because it is good to inform yourself. But it’s also good to understand the limitations of a thesis. This buffering act will help us but it won’t be able to do so much longer. And we don’t even have a plan.
Comment my own thesis: If you’ve got an idea that’s less insane than filling the skies with sulfur dioxide, don’t let me slow you down for an instance. I just want to make sure that people understand the scope of the situation. It’s… quite very bad.
It takes about ~30 years to see the effects of emissions on the climate
This is a long debunked myth.
Here is an article that goes into some detail.
So there is some hope, if we can stop emoting CO2 ASAP. If one finds that a realistic path to belive in on the other hand is a matter of opinion.
I think it’s a misunderstanding, not a myth.
CO2 influences the greenhouse effect - keeping more solar energy on Earth.
Solar energy gets converted into heat, heat gets absorbed. Some of it gets absorbed by oceans. Some of CO2 also gets absorbed by oceans - their pH decreases. The greenhouse effect doesn’t require great time, but oceanic warming and acidification does require time. Interaction happens on the surface, but the volume is great.
Thus, delays in response are inevitable. Response may also depend on circulation - an ocean current slowing or speeding up.
what about carbon capture?
Imagine a bull in a china shop destroying everything, now there is two options :
- 1- you take the bull out of the shop
- 2- you decide that it would be to inconvenient to take the bull out but you are sure that in a few decades we will invent a technology that can repair the China faster than the bull is destroying it.
Carbon capture is the option 2, we continue to break the carbon molecules for energy pretending that we can recapture later. It’s not gonna happen, we need to stop emitting NOW and maybe we can think about carbon capture.
Apparently the scale that’s required makes it completely impractical, especially given the timelines that are also required.
As far as I know, we don’t have any CC ideas that wouldn’t push us over our emissions limit to create at the scale we would need.
It’s a pipe dream at the scale we need it
Only in the way that can be monetized or industrialized, and only if we actually cut down on emissions (instead of just slowing the growth rate a little)
There’s plastic bottles everywhere. There’s people everywhere. What if every human spent an hour a day on little algae bioreactors? It’s grade school level science, all you need is bottles, non-potable water, a knife, and any old cloth to strain it out.
And, of course, algae… But once you get started, that’ll be easy to come by. It’ll even naturally adapt to local conditions, and there’s versions that can be used as food - the rest can be dried and used as fertilizer. It not only provides nutrients and increases water retention, it also helps mycillium regrow, repairing the soil. This also reduces runoff and feeds into water tables
Ever since this idea popped into my head, I’ve felt there’s something there - I met someone working for a company that is doing this commercially, and I can’t help but think if we can do it in a distributed manner it could help with a lot of issues
No incentive, even for biochar for terra preta.
Gamify it. Everyone starts out with a basic setup. The organization coordinating the effort can add additional incentives. Add achievements, unlockables, larger setups, rare algaes and algae colors. Loot boxes with various supplies. Three factions that compete against each other. Leaderboards, both local and global.
It would be simultaneously competitive and cooperative towards a common goal.
This looks like that “tipping point” that climatologists have been warning about
No, the GP is talking about proportional effects. A tipping point is some completely different thing.
This could easily be the effect of crossing a tipping point.
Right, the graph could be due to a tipping point. If that’s the case, none of what the parent post said applies, since the post is all about proportional effects.
EDIT: Hum, I think I’ve misread the OP. I though this was a reply to the post about delayed effects.
Thank a conservative. There will be no solution to climate change while conservatives have any power at all. The time for aggressive action to end conservatism is now.
2x click on 2021, compare to 1990
Why aren’t you making your point in plain English instead of this roundabout way?
If you’re implying that we should look at China’s emissions – China’s cumulative and per capita emissions are lower than the US. China is basically on par with the EU in terms of per capita emissions, so if anyone has some catching up to do it’s the US with 2x (twice!) as much emissions per capita.
If that’s not your point, then that’s my bad – I see way too many people try to shift blame onto China in these conversations.
Also consider that the majority of the world has offloaded the majority of their manufacturing to China in that same timeframe, so it’s not even a fair comparison to start with.
Oceans only go up
this is a nightmare
Oh good, I was due for my daily dose of terror.
Is this going to effect hurricane season in the way I think it will?
Hurricanes are quite fickle, they need specific conditions, and due to El Niño they are less likely to occur.
Cool thanks for the answer
It will make storms stronger; it will only marginally help cyclogenesis.
High wind shear during El Niño prevents hurricane formation. But these ones that do form will have an record-breaking amount of heat to draw from.
Thx
Does this mean we’re gonna have very strong storms?
Please keep Elninio in mind.
Climate change certainly plays a big part, but currently Elninio is likely the most impacting thing
I can’t awnser @Skyler
Yes, Climate change, as said, plays a very significant role, but Elninio currently makes it a lot worse, the last Elninios where very weak, this one now relatively strong
There were multiple El Nino events during the period of 1982-2022 and yet none of them come close to 2023.
This is also related to the change in fuels for ships. They banned something that emits aerosols which has reduced the masking effect. And this started prior to El Niño starting. It’s likely a combination of the above and some other tipping point shenanigans
Oh, didn’t know that interesting. Thanks
Heavy particulate smog cools the planet. Horrible for people, but has masked how bad CO2 has increased global heating.
As many places have cleaned up diesel fuel emissions, the heating has increased.
The US East coast pollution of the 1970’s was a major contribution to the drought in Ethiopia in the 80’s. Dense smog blocks ocean evaporation. Chinese heavy smog has been causing a lot of the drought conditions in the western US due to the same factors.
I find it amazing how each Continent causes changes in other Continents.
Guess we should cover earth in a nice thick layer of dust for a few years until we solved the climate problem…
There are people that seriously propose that.
Isnt that what happened in the Matrix and why the world was left in desolation due to the crazy weather that that caused?
Ahhh i don’t want to hear about possible consequences!
Essentially. We’d have to continue creating a masking effect, while stopping and reducing CO².
I think if humanity joined forces, a united effort, we could fix it, but I think we won’t, because of the greedy few.
Or better yet, space bubbles!!
