General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOr we could continue to ignore ALL the warnings and pump even more carbon into the atmosphere...
If you ignore it, its goes away. Right?
stuntcat
(12,022 posts)worldwide carbon emissions are going to go up and up, only societal collapse will stop that. Looking forward to some green revolution seems romantic to people lately but no, our natural world is on a downward trashy spiral for the rest of this century.
exboyfil
(17,863 posts)In a worldwide highly competitive world being the first to "disarm" on cheap carbon will make you less competitive. In fact countries like Canada will benefit from the global warming and the opening of the Northwest passage. That is not to say that we should not move towards renewables as quickly as possible or find ways to reduce our usage of energy. Both also have strategic advantages in a worldwide economy, but things will not change until the last ounce of cheap oil is pumped from the ground. The only way to stop it would be to take out the wells and someone will come along and start pumping again eventually.
At least in the U.S. we should try to capture all the externalities of tar sands and fracking for example. I think those properly captured will lead us to other solutions.
We should be investing in research in technical approaches to mitigate the impact of carbon and other greenhouse gases.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)What ever Lola wants, Lola gets....
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)You know, when the drought is so severe that pouring more and more petro-derived fertilizer will not save anyone else from world-wide famine. Right about then there will be a massive reduction in emissions I would be.
Another unmentioned reduction feedback loop will be when everyone can cook their meat on the sidewalks, and the gas and electric ranges will be retired for good.
hatrack
(59,585 posts)Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)Drill baby, drill!
---- or -----
Drill baby, drill! With Windmills.
upi402
(16,854 posts)I mean I have never had so much choice!
Rmoney alone gives me 3 choices.
Obama gives me at least one of those same choices, maybe two of them.
If I squint my eyes, plug my ears tightly, and say "LA LA LA LA LA" really loud....
ItsTheMediaStupid
(2,800 posts)Climate change wasn't even mentioned.
I don't get the weather channel with the cable package I have now, but when I had it last year, they did talk about climate change.
I haven't watched network news in ages and I was struck with the emphasis on the drama and the show. I miss the news back in the day, when it was a public service, not a profit center. It done a lot better and there as a clear line between hard news and opinion.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)1.) A stalled, blocking high pressure system south of Greenland
2.) A deep trough in the jet stream
3.) Abnormally warm Atlantic sea surface temperatures
The first two have been shown by Jennifer Francis of Rutgers to be related to the record Arctic melt (see http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021655079) and the third is just plain old GW.
Not even the Weather Channel talks about them.