discuss The Environmental Thread - Earth Matters, so what's holding us back?

[Cannuck]

I believe everyone would agree on at least one point - planet Earth matters! For years, scholars and environmentalists have touted the idea - that the boundaries of life on our planet have been stretched to a breaking point by human activity. From a scientific perspective, the notion of climate change is no longer up for debate. Our species and life as it exists on planet Earth now depends on the choices we humans make. Each individual with a brain possesses the ability to contribute solutions to our common current dilemma, so what's holding us back?

Is it our lack of knowledge; a conflict of interest; the lack of will, and/or other priorities that define the human race? Do we possess the courage to take an initiative, to act upon our convictions and choose to help preserve the Blue planet? Have our environmental problems become too big for individuals to tackle that we must leave it for governments to handle?

Are we limited by our own self-interests, by the confines of our own box or bubble? Have we merely been caught up in our daily mundane existence, distracted by the media and current affairs, that we fail to consider the future? Is Climate Change simply a hoax? Is the human species destined to evolve or are we doomed to extinction?

Here is place to discuss any pertinent thoughts or ideas you may have on the subject. Every thought counts. Please be respectful.

 

[dna]

 

[Cannuck]

She has a point, solar and wind power are not the only options. If we actually were able to harness the true power of our DNA, we wouldn't have such a climate of contradiction.

 

[Cannuck]

What's holding us back?

Carbon sense and fracking nonsense...

https://frack-off.org

 

[dna]

 

[Cannuck]

Good to have debate, for instance, he says "we are in one of the coldest periods in earth history", which may be true. This is fortunate because if it weren't, we would not have the luxury of time to take proactive action.

If you look at the data, the 10 warmest years in the 143-year modern climate record have all occurred since 2010, with the last nine years ranking as the nine warmest years on record. Satellite data clearly shows polar ice caps diminishing.

Data from the Arctic provides keys to understanding how much sea ice has melted:

Data from Antarctic shows the ice is diminishing at an even greater rate:

Unfortunately, Dr Moore has often quoted faulty evidence and debunked research to fuel his book sales. Yet climate denialists (like PragerU) have gobbled it up, afterall, they are funded largely by the fossil fuel industry.

 

[dna]

 

[Cannuck]

Herein lies the paradox... it will require burning more fossil fuels in order to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.

That said, the use of fossil fuel could be more fuel efficient. For instance, by producing carburators that are more effective at atomizing vapours to obtain better fuel economy, which in turn, would effect oil companies bottom line, who essentially hold us at their whim regarding gas prices. Personally, I prefer to be energy independent and have largely succeeded in doing so. I walk the talk.

Big oil has been lobbying Washington for decades, and only recently been challenged by rising awareness in the environmental movement. Besides Climate Change, nobody can deny that plastic production and waste is a major contributor to pollution globally. Most plastic is made from fossil fuels.

Delegates working to end global plastics pollution agree to craft a draft treaty​

Likewise, many nations who import fossil fuels are desperate to eliminate their dependence on it, ie. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has spurred major oil and gas imports from the US (largely from strategic reserves). US has become a net exporter for the first time since WW2.

 

[dna]

 

[Cannuck]

Relying on Youtube videos for information from external sources blocks intuitive access to your innate DNA. This is a common trend amongst Millenials and GenZ. It's not your fault, many are addicted to the Internet, video games, television and cellphone. It's the same with fossil fuel reliance and dependence - most simply don't know how to live without, lack the knowledge and ability, nor possess the will to break free. I have confidence that there will be breakthroughs in new technology and simple solutions within the next decade. Where there is a will, there is a way. The world is not lost, but it will likely become worse before it gets better. Oil companies will squeeze society for every drop.

 

[Cannuck]

I have confidence that there will be breakthroughs in new technology and simple solutions within the next decade. Where there is a will, there is a way. The world is not lost, but it will likely become worse before it gets better.

The countries with the largest fossil fuel reserves have the largest global influence to limit climate change. For instance, Canada is a net fossil fuel exporter (exporting 6.5X more oil than is imported) has a much higher oil reserve ratio than United States. It needs to remain in the ground if we are to meet global targets of reduction. Of course there will be resistance, but all oil-producing regions of the world (except possibly the US), will likely see strong declines in production over the next decade as countries transition away from fossil fuel to clean energy sources. Any investment in fossil fuels today risk becoming extinct like the dinosaurs it was was made from, IMO.

 

[Cannuck]

Age, income, location, and politics have considerable influence on attitudes toward solar power...

The new face of the American solar consumer​

Homeowners from Southern California to Northern Maine are motivated to lower their energy costs. Power outages affect Democrats, Republicans and Independents alike. The profile of a U.S. solar owner is changing to reflect the universal need for reliable, affordable electricity: contrary to popular belief, many of those considering solar are older, less wealthy, and more geographically and politically diverse than those who already have solar systems.

Gen Z and Millennials lead the charge on solar homes: 70% of respondents who currently have solar panels on their home are millennials or Gen Zers. By comparison, 18% of panel owners are members of Generation X, while only 12% are Baby Boomers. However, 52% of Baby Boomers answered that they would consider getting solar, while Gen Xers had the highest percentage of those likely to take no steps at all (10%).

https://cleantechnica.com/2022/01/08/unpacking-peoples-attitudes-toward-solar-power/

 

[dna]

 

[Cannuck]

...a Zillenial favourite.

 

[Cannuck]

Debunking the debunker @dna

Dr Moore and CBC Rex Murphy discuss Climate Change

Note: I respect both men, but clearly Dr Moore needs to better check his understanding of paleoclimatology...

First, they discuss plastic pollution which Dr Moore claims cannot be seen... images from NASA suggest otherwise:

https://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/149000/149163/microplastics_cygnss_2018268.mp4

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org

Dr Moore then goes on to say what can't be seen can't hurt you (like CO2)... compare today's level to the glacial record going back 800,000 years:

Then Dr. Moore states that 2.5 millions of years ago, during the age of dinosaurs, CO2 levels were much higher than today. This is true, but sea levels were upwards of 200 meters higher, therefore could absorb more CO2.

What would happen if the polar ice melted, the CO2 trapped in ice was released and ocean temperatures rose?

How could we then prevent global warming from occuring at an unprecedented rate?

Dr Moore also mentions that cooler oceans absorb CO2, warmer waters emit CO2, here is a snapshot of ocean temperatures rising over the last few decades:

To the untrained bystander, the climate debate is confusing, I get that. But when the body of human knowledge is proven by modern science, the debate becomes moot.

If global energy demand continues to grow rapidly and we meet it mostly with fossil fuels, human emissions of carbon dioxide could reach 75 billion tons per year or more by the end of the century. It took millions of years for CO2 levels to change by the same amount we have produced in one century through emissions. It takes time for nature to adjust.

It is not alarmist. Nature will find a way (it always does), but the threat of human extinction is certainly evident. In the face of overwhelming evidence, would it not be in our collective best interest and for the the remainder of the planet's species to at least try to make an effort?

 

[Cannuck]

Arctic Ocean could be ice-free in summer by 2030s

Why this matters​

Arctic sea ice is an important component of the climate system. As it dramatically reduces the amount of sunlight absorbed by the ocean, removing this ice is predicted to further accelerate warming, through a process known as a positive feedback. This, in turn, will make the Greenland ice sheet melt faster, which is already a major contributor to sea level rise.

The loss of sea ice in summer would also mean changes in atmospheric circulation and storm tracks, and fundamental shifts in ocean biological activity.

Mechanisms and Impacts of Earth System Tipping Elements​

In recent years, discussions of climate change have shown growing interest in “tipping elements” of the Earth system, also imprecisely referred to as “tipping points.” This refers to Earth system components like the tropical rainforests of Amazonia or the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets which may exhibit large-scale, long-term changes upon reaching critical global warming, greenhouse gas, or other thresholds.

Once such thresholds are passed, some tipping elements could in turn produce additional greenhouse gas emissions or change the Earth's energy balance in ways that moderately reinforce warming. Overall, even considering remaining scientific uncertainties, tipping elements will influence future climate change and may involve major impacts on ecosystems, climate patterns, and the carbon cycle. Aggressive efforts to stabilize climate change could significantly reduce such impacts.

 

[Cannuck]

Where there's wildfire, there's smoke... and associated health risks.

 

[Samer]

This one is all Canada’s fault.

 

[dna]

Arctic Ocean could be ice-free in summer by 2030s

The earth could be destroyed by meteors by 2029.
The United States have a nuclear war with Russia by 2024.
Solar flares from the Sun could destroy all life on earth by 2027.
Kamala Harris could become president by 2024.

 

[Cannuck]

This one is all Canada’s fault.

The earth could be destroyed by meteors by 2029.
The United States have a nuclear was with Russia by 2024.
Solar flares from the Sun could destroy all life on earth by 2027.
Kamala Harris could become president by 2024.

Conspiracy theorists would agree...

 

[Cannuck]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1666754988335329280

In response, American composer Marc Shaiman rewrote his tongue-in-cheek song he co-wrote for the cartoon South Park, “Blame Canada”.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1666533320002347008

 

[Cannuck]

Just imagine what it will be like in a decade or or sooner, when Arctic ice melts and the natural cooling effect causes temperatures to rise, forests get drier and burn, the largest natural source of CO2 filter and fresh air will be depleted.

A return of the "30's Dust Bowl" is not mere speculation...

Share of global cumulative CO2 emissions (2023 estimates)

USA 25%
Europe 17%
China 15%
UK 5%
India 4%
Canada 2%

https://ourworldindata.org/map

I'm not saying we should halt all fossil fuel production now, but rather, use these resources to proactively respond by rebuilding infrastructure and clean energy sources that will temper the effects of Climate Change.

 

[dna]

The air in Earth's atmosphere is made up of approximately 78 percent nitrogen
and 21 percent oxygen and 0.04% carbon dioxide.
If the green plants stopped taking carbon dioxide, they will die, and the human
beings and animals would not get oxygen and would die too.
But idiots want to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

 

[Cannuck]

The air in Earth's atmosphere is made up of approximately 78 percent nitrogen
and 21 percent oxygen and 0.04% carbon dioxide.
If the green plants stopped taking carbon dioxide, they will die, and the human
beings and animals would not get oxygen and would die too.
But idiots want to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Why would plants stop taking in CO2? Bizarre...let me explain in simple terms that even an idiot can understand.

Perhaps you have never heard of, nor studied in school about the "Greenhouse Effect".

The atmosphere is responsible for the delicate heat balance of the planet. For example, Venus has a very thick layer of clouds, like a blanket (or greenhouse). The surface temperature of the planet is very high, hot enough to melt lead.

The more the greenhouse gas, the more effective it is at trapping heat from the planet surface because these gases absorb energy. Half of the energy bounces back to Earth and half of it into space. This trapping of heat is what we call the "Greenhouse Effect".

Are you saying that plants and animals did not exist prior to the Industrial Revolution? Have you ever counted tree rings? Each ring represents one year of growth. For instance, a colony of Huon pine trees in Tasmania is estimated to be around 10,000 years old (determined by DNA samples).

The burning of fossil fuels affects the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. Before the Industrial Revolution, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was about 288 ppm. We have now reached about 414 ppm. This roughly 2-degree Fahrenheit (1 degrees Celsius) increase in global average surface temperature has occurred since the pre-industrial era when we first began to use fossil fuel (ie. burning coal in factories and steam locomotives).

We are on the way to doubling the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. If CO2 doubles, it could raise the average surface temperature of the Earth between two and five degrees Celsius (called global warming).

Both water vapor and CO2 are responsible for global warming due to the "Greenhouse Effect". Increased CO2 in the atmosphere causes the oceans to naturally warm up. Warmer oceans cannot absorb as much CO2 which in turn traps heat in the planet's atmosphere and increases water vapor due to evaporation. Increased water vapour traps heat within the atmosphere like a blanket or the "Greenhouse Effect" which results in Climate Change - the natural response of releasing energy into the Earth's atmosphere.

By burning fossil fuels we increase the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is this increase which disturbs the entire heat balance of the planet. We cannot control water evaporation rates, but we can control the release of CO2 by switching to clean energy sources and other means of carbon sequestration, or carbon storage.

For more detail, see:

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature

 

[Cannuck]

The atmosphere is responsible for the delicate heat balance of the planet. For example, Venus has a very thick layer of clouds, like a blanket (or greenhouse). The surface temperature of the planet is very high, hot enough to melt lead.

Can Venus Teach Us to Take Climate Change Seriously?​

https://www.space.com/42570-venus-model-for-climate-change.html

 

[dna]

Can Venus Teach Us to Take Climate Change Seriously?

Venus is 67 million miles from the Sun.
The Earth is 93 million miles from the Sun.
Are you seriously blaming the temperature on Venus on climate change?