/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10202407]

When do you think shit will hit the fan globally in terms of climate change? Like a great worldwide economic depression because of climate disasters.

[Anonymous No.10202416]

>When do you think shit will hit the fan globally in terms of climate change?
never, because climate change is pseudoscience

[Anonymous No.10202419]

>>10202407
never

[Anonymous No.10202421]

>climate disasters
>not 3 consecutive years of 30% agricultural productivity/global famine

[Anonymous No.10202563]

>>10202407
ten years max.

[Anonymous No.10202714]

>>10202407
>Worrying about some ambiguous looming threat while ignoring the immediate obvious problems right in front of you

[Anonymous No.10202745]

>>10202714
>not already in alaska with the rest of /k/

[Anonymous No.10202810]

>>10202407
I'd give it somewhere in the range of 10-15 years truthfully. At that point most of the southern and western US would be desert, well more than it already is now, and the majority of agriculture would be pretty unsustainable.

[Anonymous No.10202882]

>>10202563
>>10202810
This.


Except ironically because alarmists have been saying this for the last 50 years.

[Anonymous No.10202893]

Government will take care of it

I just need to vote for the credible man to president and congress

[Anonymous No.10202896]

>>10202882
>alarmists
>not scientists
Before we had very little understanding of the impacts, and people like Al gore ended up soiling the name climate scientist. Obviously we're going to get it wrong since scientists cant predict human carbon emissions exactly and this has never happened before. The idea that people in the 80 would know what would happen in the 2010s is like giving a final for a class on the first day.

[Anonymous No.10203048]

>>10202407
>When do you think shit will hit the fan globally in terms of climate change? Like a great worldwide economic depression because of climate disasters.
5 years ago according to Al Gore

[Anonymous No.10203056]

>>10203048
Are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.10203065]

>>10203048
9 years ago according to the UN

[Anonymous No.10204277]

>>10202416
>climate change is pseudoscience
why is this opinion so popular? trump shills?

[Anonymous No.10204341]

>>10202407
Never because by the time shit hits the fan people will just throw money into carbon sequestration and turn some into synthetic hydrocarbons

Canadian startup is already working on making it more cost-effective, they have a pilot plant working

[Anonymous No.10204351]

>>10204277
Because climate researchers keep predicting that global warming/climate change will cause massive problems 10 to 20 years in the future, and well, 10 or 20 years later no real problems happened. Whatever climate change that is happening is moving at a far slower pace than the doomsayers predict.

[Anonymous No.10204353]

>>10204351
I know sweaty, reading comprehension is hard

[Anonymous No.10204358]

>>10204341
This here - in addition there are plenty of other methods of fighting climate change that can be used to minimize the negative effects of climate change to a tolerable level for relatively cheap. The cost estimates for both sulfur aerosols & marine cloud brightening are in the $10 to $20 billion a year to completely block any plausible warming effect.

[Anonymous No.10204359]

>>10204351
>warming must be stopped by date x to avoid catastrophy
and
>catastrophy will come about by date x
are not the same

[Anonymous No.10204423]

>>10202407
around 450ppm the rainfall will fail, by 50% to 75% in US latitudes, 23...40
At current rate that'll be around 2030
So the '30s will be fun

[Anonymous No.10204497]

>>10202407
Crops are already starting to fail, with the wheat crisis of 2011 for example, and it is only going to get worse. This combined with 80 million more people on the planet every year is going to make the 21st century a wild one.

[Anonymous No.10204510]

>>10204341
I'll believe it when I see it

[Anonymous No.10204539]

In Europe we already have crop failures but so long as the rest of the world does not also have crop failures we are fine. But the first time we cannot import food from abroad shit is going down.

[Anonymous No.10204543]

>>10202407
It's already beginning.

[Anonymous No.10204544]

>>10204543
Oh, and we're due another financial crisis in about 2 to 3 years by the looks of things.

[Anonymous No.10204547]

>>10202407
build a satellite that blocks sunlight, problem solved

[Anonymous No.10204561]

>>10204544
Yeah, they seems to happen on a 12 to 15 year cycle and the last one was exactly 10 years ago. I am hoping to make as much money as I can in the next few years before the next crash, so I can profit on the cheap stocks.

[Anonymous No.10204586]

>>10202407
Soon, hopefully. The quicker these apes kill each other off, the better the world will be. It will sting, what with all the radiation, but cosmologically it will all be negligible and the universe would have been saved from potentially one of the most horrid and wretched viruses to afflict its sanctity. All those species we exterminated will not have gone extinct in vain. And if I may have one last hope, I hope those billionaires for whom this was all worth their precious money literally drown in their molten gold, as happened to Crassus.

[Blank No.10204598]

>>10204358
C-can we turn this planet into a paradise? A Gaia planet, as prophesized by the bible.

[Anonymous No.10204632]

>>10204547
easy, only has to be the size of fucking India

[Anonymous No.10204737]

>>10204632
Or the collective surface area of.
If you can get orbital manufacturing and accompanying infrastructure going its trivial.

[Anonymous No.10204763]

>>10204586
>caring about some gay ass species
>thinking a single billionaire is going to suffer because of climate change

[Anonymous No.10204770]

We keep seeing freak storm. 500 year storms happen almost every year now.
Massive flooding hit Tailand and Western Digital's hard drive manufacturing industry and caused the prices to increase 50%.

Once one of those storms destroys an industry the world literally can't live without, the shit will hit the fan.

Maybe flooding ruins the only lithium mine in the world and lithium batteries are no longer a thing. Smart phones, laptops, and electric cars vanish overnight.

[Anonymous No.10204790]

>>10202407
Never because it is bullshit to scam money out of the population. You can see it right now when politicans talk about climate refugee. Just hope that 90% of the population will never read your "studies" and you are good to go.

With that being said, I still believe that way before climate change will even get the chance to fuck us we will have developed more efficient ways to generate energy. If we don't we will have sustainability problems way before that.

[Anonymous No.10204791]

Depends on how humans handle the situation. Legislation against climate change is almost more damaging economically that the effects of climate change themselves. As it stands, there are no serious solutions such as lagrange point research stations or nuclear energy proliferation, and if it does becomes an issue we'll sooner destroy ourselves before it does any significant damage, for the sake of humanitarianism.

[Anonymous No.10204797]

>>10204358

1.) there is no climate change
2.) there is climate change but it's not human-made
3.) human-made climate change is real but it only hits the shit hole countries anyway, it's actually good for us
4.) it's real but we're fucked anyway with all these assholes around, nothing you can do
5.) geo-engineering will fix it soon, no need to change anything now <----you are here
6.) ok, geo-engineering made it worse but now we learned and can stop it(it's too late)
7.) fucking leftists destroyed the world, as expected

[Anonymous No.10204805]

>>10204797
What's your solution?

[Anonymous No.10204807]

>>10204805
Not him but I would prefer acting only if you have a proper solution. Don't just try to push your poltical agenda because that is what climate change currently is about.

[Anonymous No.10204812]

>great worldwide economic depression
so you mean basically what we have now with the exception of a handful of countries

[Anonymous No.10204813]

>>10204807
That's my point. There's no legitimate solution being proposed. It's just people screaming about it and wanting to limit economic capacity, which isn't even a solution, but a mere inhibitor.

[Anonymous No.10204815]

>>10204791
>Legislation against climate change is almost more damaging economically that the effects of climate change themselves.
I'd challenge that fallacy with a simple fact.

>industry that focuses on non-renewable that's damaging to the environment
>economy is limited by non-renewable resources and limited in how much damage the environment can endure

>industry that focuses on renewable resources and has byproducts that become part of cycles of nature
>economy has potential for unlimited growth as over infinite time there's infinite renewable resources and there's no limit to how much you can help the environment

I know that sounds crazy but it's the facts. Renewable and cyclical industry has more economic potential.
There could be a period of economic stiffing as things change over, but these are just growing pains.

[Anonymous No.10204821]

>>10204807
So you would rather have the world burn to the ground than institute carbon taxes?

[Anonymous No.10204823]

>>10204815
>I know that sounds crazy but it's the facts. Renewable and cyclical industry has more economic potential
Of course it does, it's the very definition of renewable energy. But then you may wonder why we started using fossil fuels in the first place.
That is because it is way more efficient with our current state of technology. You can't just flip the switch and turn every coal power plant into a solar panel.
Nuclear power is also renewable. Maybe we should use that one. So far renewable energy sources have been a major money sink with no real pay off.

[Anonymous No.10204826]

>>10204821
I would rather pay less money than have nothing happen at all. Climate change will not affect us for a very long time and even then it'*s not gonna be a doomsday device. Natural climate change will cause warming anyway so we would only delay the inevitable if you believe the scientists.

[Anonymous No.10204830]

>>10204815
>economy is limited by non-renewable resources and limited in how much damage the environment can endure
in what ways
>economy has potential for unlimited growth as over infinite time there's infinite renewable resources and there's no limit to how much you can help the environment
trees are a renewable resource and there are a limited number of trees on earth. what the fuck are you talking about.

[Anonymous No.10204832]

>>10204815
>facts
theory

I'm all for industrial alternatives, but that type of legislation isn't prioritized or even proposed. I'm not going to support carbon taxes or anything like that.

[Anonymous No.10204834]

>>10204826
>this is your brain on retard

[Anonymous No.10204853]

>>10204805
blaming leftists of course.I mean they forced us to deny climate change for so long because they put it on their agenda.

[Anonymous No.10204856]

>>10204834
I see your proofs are as non existent as your IQ

[Anonymous No.10204867]

>>10204823
>So far renewable energy sources have been a major money sink with no real pay off.
>no real pay off.
Solar power technology is advancing rapidly. This is due to money being sunk into it. In the past you could say "solar isn't economically efficient and only hippies want it" and you'd be right if you said that 25 years ago. Not true any more. Even less true in the future.

>>10204830
>trees are a renewable resource and there are a limited number of trees on earth.
Please look up the definition of renewable before joining the conversation.

>>10204832
Carbon taxes was a poorly thought out way to reward countries with low carbon footprints and punish those with larger ones. It's a nightmare to enforce those rules but ignoring that's it's still dumb.
The fears are going carbon neutral will hurt your country, and give carbon producing countries the edge. What they need to do is develop the technology so carbon neutral countries are economically superior because carbon neutral technology is superior. Then the tables are flipped and carbon producing countries become at economic disadvantage. This can only happen by adopting/pouring money into new tech.

[Anonymous No.10204881]

>>10204867
>Not true any more
Then we should cut all the subsidies. But we are not doing that because it is still not profitable. The manufacturing of solar panels also releases huge amount of CO2 but that's ok for most people I guess. Right now without coal and oil we would be fucked. And no amount of solar panels is gonna change that.

[Anonymous No.10204894]

>>10204881
Do you realize how many subsidies coal and oil get every year? The amount we give to renewable sources is a drop in the bucket compared to that. Same thing with the amount of carbon solar panels create, small potatoes in comparison to the carbon per watt of coal and oil.

[Anonymous No.10204895]

>>10204881
>cut all the subsidies
But coal, oil, natural as, and nuclear all get subsidies too. With the exception of nuclear, none of those have the potential for technological growth and change.

Also, pic related
>Based on that study, solar PV works out to about 50g of CO2 per kWh compared to coal's 975g of CO2 per kWh, or about 20x "cleaner."

[Anonymous No.10204912]

>>10204737
if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle

[Anonymous No.10205259]

>>10204894
I am not saying that that's good either.
>>10204895
Then why aren't big energy companies building much more solar panels ?

[Anonymous No.10205508]

>>10202407
According to The Holy Church or Climate Change, it appears as if its predicted roughly every 5-7 years.

So hard to say really.

[Anonymous No.10205535]

Imagine still thinking climate change is important in 2018.
Such a waste of time and money fighting this boogeyman.

[Anonymous No.10205542]

>>10205535
Especially as all the rhetoric is now "we're too late to stop it." Why should I bother changing anything if scientists are already telling me it doesn't matter what I do?

[Anonymous No.10205556]

>>10205542
Meanwhile we have a plastic island floating in the pacific the size of a continent and agricultural and plastic pollution in every part of our food chain.

But no, the whole world is focused on 0.8 degrees of warming over the last 100 years which has yet to be proven as atypical. Fucking idiotic.

[Anonymous No.10205587]

>>10205556
>plastic island the size of a continent
Pics?

[Anonymous No.10205639]

>>10205556
>plastic
Yeah, another issue much more interesting than climate change and it's even something that can be changed. But I guess you can't scare people with plastic bottles.

[Anonymous No.10205643]

>>10205639
>something that can be changed
>bigger issue han climate change
no have no idea how fucked this world is

[Anonymous No.10205662]

>>10205643
Wow, did you just assume my world knowledge, shitlord ?

[Anonymous No.10205696]

>>10204791
US government just said that US GDP will decrease by 10% by the end of the century due to damage from climate change. And that is within the projected 2 decree warming which is unrealistic at this point.

Protip: don't learn your climate change from some corrupt economist.

[Anonymous No.10205703]

>>10205696
Why would an economist want policies that reduce efficiency? Use your head.

[Anonymous No.10205721]

>>10204341
it's the
>random millenial/zoomer trendy and overhyped startup kids HAVE DISCOVERED THE WAY TO SAVE THE EARTH and basically you're fucking stupid
- read more on Vice News

kill yourself, mental nigger and get off this board

[Anonymous No.10205726]

>>10205703
I hoped you weren't a shill, but now I see that I was wasting my time.

[Anonymous No.10205770]

>>10204821
>Taxing poor people to fund more immigrant programs and line fat cat pockets will save the planet

The fucking state of this board. Carbon taxes will do a sum total of fuck all.

[Anonymous No.10205784]

>>10204821
Carbon taxes are just what some economists propose. Other economists argue that pigovian taxes only work under certain conditions and that they are not suitable in this situation.

[Anonymous No.10205787]

>>10205770
You could in theory tax everyone on their carbon footprint and then divide it up and give it back to everyone. This would eliminate the burden on poor people and middle class people.
However it is too socialistic to be allowed by those that be.

[Anonymous No.10205987]

>>10204358
This,
We should be controlling the climate and not letting it control us.

[Anonymous No.10205993]

>>10202407
far more likely that the consequences of out of control economic/population growth will be felt first.

[Anonymous No.10206035]

>>10204277
I think problem come from the multiple announces of a date, see >>10203065 and >>10203048
and retards take it like it will be the end of the world

[Anonymous No.10206093]

>>10204358

I mean all those are potential helpers and we will almost definitely need to use some of them or people will starve, buuuut if we don't fix the basic problem then it'll just keep getting worse and more costly. Plus, you know, changing our energy sources is actually just a generally good idea. Solar is getting efficient enough that moderately well-off homeowners in decently sunny areas can set up their own rigs and long term be better off. That's only going to get better.

[Anonymous No.10206157]

>>10205784
The problem with a straight Pigovian tax for this is that it's regressive, and then you get guys in yellow vests rightfully protesting about how it's unfair. If it was like cigarettes where it's basically a luxury that would be one thing, but everyone is going to use fuel in some way for now. >>10205787 is the right idea, it helps the poor slightly instead of hurting them.

[Anonymous No.10206572]

>>10205696
Can you be more specific?

[Anonymous No.10206701]

>>10202416
>>10202419
>>10202714
>>10203048
>>10204341
>>10204351
Somehow this board is more scientifically and politically illiterate than fucking /tv/

It's happening, it's fucking us soon, but if you're posting in this thread it probably won't affect you as directly.
You'll just be fucked because there'll be hundreds of millions of refugees coming to your country.

[Anonymous No.10206703]

>>10202407
cc is FAKE

[Anonymous No.10206725]

>>10204790
Jesus you are dangerously stupid.

[Anonymous No.10206731]

>>10206703

[Anonymous No.10206736]

>>10206572
The report is here:
https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/

[Anonymous No.10206749]

>>10206157
That is one problem. But some economists also argue that in some cases punitive taxes do not do enough to curb bad externalities, anyway. There some sort of curve (as always lol) and if you're above the curve Pigovian taxes don't work.

[Anonymous No.10206756]

>>10206749
It's already been shown that carbon emissions are elastic and that carbon taxes reduce emissions. The wonton is not one tax rate but an optimal one that responds to the market and climate.

[Anonymous No.10206761]

>>10202896
But people in the 2010s totally know what's going to happen in the 2040s. Ok.

[Anonymous No.10206765]

>>10204353
Talks shit about reading comprehension calls someone sweaty instead of sweetie. Good job moran.

[Anonymous No.10206809]

>>10206761
Take a look around you, see that thing in front of you that has the ability to find any piece of information, simulate anything. Don't think people had that in the 80s, times have changed, we can simulate, replicate, do whatever that we could not back then.

[Blank No.10206814]

>>10206701
And if you dont welcome them (unless that would result in the danger of your family), then your soul will be in danger. Lord have mercy

[Anonymous No.10206815]

>>10206765
How new are you, sweaty?

[Anonymous No.10206832]

>>10206809
In 2039 I will invent a Perpetuum Mobile. Poof problem solved

[Anonymous No.10206842]

>>10202407
>depression
hahaha in what reality does some irrelevant polynesian islands sinking offset the benefit of longer growing seasons?
you really got memed on

[Blank No.10206845]

>>10202407
Shit hits the fan constantly, but Your mind is Limited, and you only see whats Close to you.

[Anonymous No.10206850]

man made climate change is fake and gay pic related

[Anonymous No.10206859]

>>10206736
No, I mean, who is the corrupt economist that's pedaling the narrative?

[Anonymous No.10206861]

>>10206850
i don't have a dog in this but this pic would just as well prove that man made carbon does cause climate change. If you have the grey squares as the usual (balanced) amount of "heat trapping" gas, then adding those yellow squares would mean there's 4% more "heat trapping" than is matched to the original amount of cooling counter-effects, then temperature should increase until the effects balance again, which could be a large or small change in temperature, but certainly some

[Anonymous No.10206871]

>>10206861
??? the yellow squares are naturally occurring CO2 gasses, the only thing humans are responsible for are in red

[Anonymous No.10206898]

>>10206871
He's saying that this proves that human output has an effect on temperature, if you add more CO2 then it's bound to increase the temperature by some amount. you're trying to minimize the degree to which it's observed, but I'm not sure how old that picture is.

[Anonymous No.10206902]

>>10206871
IN - OUT = ACCUMULATION

where the order of magnitude of IN and OUT is 10^27 Watts. So if a fractional increase of CO2 can change the OUT by a proportional amount, your ACC can go up quite a bit. This is what he means by 'balanced'

[Anonymous No.10206904]

>>10206850
This pic doesn't take into account the different chemical properties of the greenhouse gases.

[Anonymous No.10206922]

We're gonna hit an economic boom

[Anonymous No.10206942]

>>10206898
yes, which is in all likelihood a negligible effect at best. also it's sourced, stop pretending you can't look up how old the data is or what the data means as far as a rise in temperature is concerned
>>10206902
he's talking about adding the yellow squares which are irrelevant because that's naturally occurring CO2 which human activity has nothing to do with. the yellow squares are there regardless of human activity
>>10206904
but it does take into account the minuscule amount of CO2 caused by human activity which is what all the kvetching is about. don't try to shift the goalposts

[Anonymous No.10206950]

>>10206942
I am not shifting anything. Just saying that the graph doesn't prove much

[Anonymous No.10206953]

>>10206950
it does though, it proves the minuscule amount of CO2 man has added to the atmosphere

[Anonymous No.10207062]

>>10202407
The environment will have to get really bad before markets adjust to it. Consumers will only change their behaviour when they are directly impacted by climate change.

Once things are that bad there will probably be an economic boom. It will generate work. Society will have a job to do, and the economy will reflect that.

The question is: how bad will we let it get?