How are you going to get the sun do to that? It's actually the key
influence in regards to climate change. It's in a solar minimal right
now so we're likely to see more "global cooling" than "global warming".
History confirms this.
I'm actually more concerned about the oceans getting polluted by
criminal run refuse companies dumping garbage with lots of plastics in
it. To me it's a sign that the human race has a built in flaw that is
used to create it's extinction when there are too many of us.
On 10/08/2018 05:10 AM, skymt...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife] wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report
snips
The world’s leading climate scientists have warned there is only a
dozen years for global warming to be kept to a maximum of 1.5C, beyond
which even half a degree will significantly worsen the risks of
drought, floods, extreme heat and poverty for hundreds of millions of
people.
The authors of the landmark report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC) released on Monday say urgent and
unprecedented changes are needed to reach the target, which they say
is affordable and feasible although it lies at the most ambitious end
of the Paris agreement pledge to keep temperatures between 1.5C and 2C.
“It’s a line in the sand and what it says to our species is that this
is the moment and we must act now,” said Debra Roberts, a co-chair of
the working group on impacts. “This is the largest clarion bell from
the science community and I hope it mobilises people and dents the
mood of complacency.”
At 1.5C the proportion of the global population exposed to water
stress could be 50% lower than at 2C, it notes. Food scarcity would be
less of a problem and hundreds of millions fewer people, particularly
in poor countries, would be at risk of climate-related poverty.
At 2C extremely hot days, such as those experienced in the northern
hemisphere this summer, would become more severe and common,
increasing heat-related deaths and causing more forest fires.
But the greatest difference would be to nature. Insects, which are
vital for pollination of crops, and plants are almost twice as likely
to lose half their habitat at 2C compared with 1.5C. Corals would be
99% lost at the higher of the two temperatures, but more than 10% have
a chance of surviving if the lower target is reached.
“We have presented governments with pretty hard choices. We have
pointed out the enormous benefits of keeping to 1.5C, and also the
unprecedented shift in energy systems and transport that would be
needed to achieve that,” said Jim Skea, a co-chair of the working
group on mitigation. “We show it can be done within laws of physics
and chemistry. Then the final tick box is political will. We cannot
answer that. Only our audience can – and that is the governments that
receive it.”
He said the main finding of his group was the need for urgency.
Although unexpectedly good progress has been made in the adoption of
renewable energy, deforestation for agriculture was turning a natural
carbon sink into a source of emissions. Carbon capture and storage
projects, which are essential for reducing emissions in the concrete
and waste disposal industries, have also ground to a halt.
Reversing these trends is essential if the world has any chance of
reaching 1.5C without relying on the untried technology of solar
radiation modification and other forms of geo-engineering, which could
have negative consequences.
Bob Ward, of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change, said
the final document was “incredibly conservative” because it did not
mention the likely rise in climate-driven refugees or the danger of
tipping points that could push the world on to an irreversible path of
extreme warming.
At the current level of commitments, the world is on course for a
disastrous 3C of warming. The report authors are refuseing to accept
defeat, believing the increasingly visible damage caused by climate
change will shift opinion their way.
James Hansen, the former Nasa scientist who helped raised the alarm
about climate change, said both 1.5C and 2C would take humanity into
uncharted and dangerous territory because they were both well above
the Holocene-era range in which human civilisation developed. But he
said there was a huge difference between the two: “1.5C gives young
people and the next generation a fighting chance of getting back to
the Holocene or close to it. That is probably necessary if we want to
keep shorelines where they are and preserve our coastal cities.”
“Climate change is occurring earlier and more rapidly than expected.
Even at the current level of 1C warming, it is painful,” he told the
Guardian. “This report is really important. It has a scientific
robustness that shows 1.5C is not just a political concession. There
is a growing recognition that 2C is dangerous.”
