Advice on Climate Change

h/t Mondi Sommersi

The tipping point of climate change denial

In a previous post I had noted how the position of climate deniers was becoming more and more untenable. Now, the speech by President Obama seems to have moved things forward quite a bit: many people seem to be "feeling the heat," almost literally.

At least, so it seems from a revealing article by Chris Ladd, Republican commentator writing on the Washington Times. This article needs to be read and savored - truly stunning for the way he clearly states how the GOP communication strategy is backfiring. Peter Sinclair has already commented on this piece; let me reproduce here some excerpts from it (highlighting mine):

..... we must realize that our strategy of blind blanket denial is developing into a political suicide pact. 

We must stop wheeling in crank “scientists” who deploy tactics borrowed from the tobacco industry to “debunk” the credible research on climate change. 


On a political level, Republicans must not confuse climate change with other science vs. belief issues. On this issue public opinion will eventually move in the direction of established facts regardless of how much distortion we generate.
 
Climate change ..... is becoming apparent enough to the average layman to affect their holiday plans. We cannot swim against this scientific tide much longer.

When public opinion comes into line with the established science, our denialist position will cost us our opportunity to participate in shaping policy. We are setting ourselves up for a sudden, catastrophic political collapse which could spread beyond this single issue.

 .... conservatives cannot participate in shaping these alternatives if the party allows itself to be defined politically by a pack of ridiculous cranks. Categorical climate denial might be the single greatest threat to the long term future of the conservative movement. For the Republican Party in the U.S., denial is a river that is rapidly running dry.


Now, the political debate is a complex system and, as such, it is subjected to rapid "phase transitions" in which issues ignored up to a certain point become suddenly centrally important. That may be the result of a single, exceptional event, such as the 9/11 attacks, or as the result of a gradually mounting body of evidence; as it may happen with climate change.

Are we seeing the climate debate tipping point arriving? We can't say yet, but note that Mr. Ladd's article didn't attract (so far) the usual flow of rabid denialist comments. So, we may be in for big changes, indeed.

Connecting the dots, anyone? 19 Firefighters killed in Arizona

Fighting catastrophic climate change is the best way we have to honor the memory of these brave firefighters who died doing their duty. (image from ABC news)

Climate change: not just a question of the past 15 years.

Recently, it has become fashionable to say that climate change is not a problem (or even that it doesn't exist) because the past 15 years haven't seen a heating of the atmosphere so fast as it used to be the rule. Well, climate change is not just a question of the past 15 years, as Steph explains here discussing the conditions of the Alps at the time of the Carthaginian General Hannibal (Image from AncientWeb.org)

The Alps over time: Hannibal

by Steph.

During the Second Punic War, in September 218, the Carthaginian general Hannibal crossed the Montgenevre pass on the Alps with 20,000 infantry, 6,000 cavalry and 21 elephants. Only half of the army that had started from Spain (90,000 infantry, 12,000 cavalry and 37 elephants) with the aim first to ally with the Gauls and then off to Italy to clash with the Roman armies. But Hannibal made an error of judgment because the Gallic tribes were generally hostile to him unless the king of the Boi, Magilo who helped him to cross the Alps. It was a grueling journey that took the lives of many soldiers. In addition the Carthaginians had to face the harsh winter of the Po Valley and according to Polybius only an elephant survived its rigors.

The Greek historian gives us his account of that event:

Troughout the lowland regions, Hannibal arrived at the foot of the Alps. At the front, there were the elephants (...) the enemies, who had never seen those animals, did not dare to approach. (...) When they reached the pass, Hannibal ordered a stop (...). At dawn (...) the march was resumed, but the descent proved more difficult than the ascent. During the night, snow had fallen and the column moved slowly. Down the steep trails, men and horses slid, falling over each other, barely restrained by shrubs and roots protruding here and there. The passage of so many men and animals turned into soft mush the thin layer of fresh snow, exposing the underlying ice (...).


In September, new snow on the ice below at 1800 m above sea level?? ... what year was this one that Hannibal chose? Where can you find, today, glaciers at 1800 m on the western Alps? Nowhere, I think.

In short: it is the curse of Ötzi (and not just that). The most recent reconstructions (see also here); less recent ones, and even Polybius, remind us that for more than 5000 years in the past the Alps never were so hot as they are today. Perhaps never so hot from the time of the last interglacial. Take into account the fact that the glaciers are not in equilibrium with current climate conditions and if they were, they would shrink even more: it's only a matter of decades.


So, if some people are so impressed that during the past 15 years the surface temperatures didn't rise so much, think of how much they changed from the times of Hannibal. And how much they still have to change in the future.

Here are some data about temperatures in the Alpine region in Europe

Büntgen et al. 2011

Büntgen et al. 2006

Signs of change: are you ready for the great transition?

Signs of change are accumulating, but most people still are not taking notice

By Alexander Ac

Is Homo sapiens a truly serious evolutionary project? And with that I mean sustainable, are we able to sustain  all what we have done and built; constructions, networks, and  knowledge into a (distant) future? Can we choose a dramatically different path that we are currently on?

There are many people thinking deeply and constantly about sustainability, global problems, overpopulation, deforestation, overfishing, soil erosion, air pollution... and on top of everything climate change; since it is a survival issue for our species. But the real question is not whether a certain number of people think about sustainability and try to live accordingly. The real question is whether we (will) do so collectively. In other words, it is not important what 50 000 people do for few hours per day (e.g. protesting Keystone pipeline), but important is what 7 billion people do for 365 days per year.

We can see that the great change from Hunters and gatherers to Agricultural societies was enabled by a stable local climate and predictable weather (and crop yields!) during the last 12 000 years. At the end of the last Ice Age, this planet was inhabited by not more than 20 000 people. We do not really want to leave the Holocene behind us.

Look carefully at the two following graphs:

Fig. 1.: The upper graph shows that we are rapidly leaving behind the Holocene temperatures. The lower graph shows that this Holocene period is exceptionally steady in the 100 000 years of temperature record from Central Greenland. Some people confuse it with global temperature record, which is not the case.


Now, the latest speech of president Obama might sound optimistic for some scientists, and even if the promises are fullfilled, which is highly questionable given the past, consider also the following graph:

Fig. 2. You do not need to be a mathematician, or to fit an exponential function to see that this rate of debt increase is not sustainable. Planet resources will not allow to repay all the debts we have created. Source: St Louis FED. Effect of planet Earth is added for illustrative purpose.

In the graph you can see the Total Credit Market Debt Owed in the USA. The same country in which Obama promised to (finally) solve climate crisis. This is not meant to criticise president Obama. This is to show what we are collectively doing. Everyone with a mortgage, or almost any other type debt is claiming exponentially growing demand on our finite planet resources. How is that compatible with declining carbon footprint?

Debt is basically a claim on the future (energy) resources. So if we are to repay ALL debts, we need to continue in the exponential growth. If we are not going to repay all debts, debt deflation is upon us. And hyperinflation later on. Well, its already happening, despite the ultra-loose monetary policy and "money-printing" (can-kicking experiments), which is in exact opposite to what needs to be done in order to solve climate change and other sustainability related problems. But you will not hear it from monetarists like Ben Bernanke or Paul Krugman.

Of course debt deflation means huge economic problems and social unrest. Again, this is already happening. But it is also a solution for the climate change problem. At least until it lasts. We need to get rid off bad debt, and use good debt to transition away from fossil fuels and climate chaos.

Are we ready for that?

As smart as a frog

h/t "Clima Fluttuante"

There is always a way

.... even in the most difficult situations, such as when fighting Catastrophic Climate Change.

h/t "Learning from Dogs"