3 ms·

Well, at this point it's possible, and not "Economic misery". What happens when the problem is ignored for another 10 years and becomes 5% of GDP?

InclinedPlane 16y ago
This isn't just a 10 year problem, it's a 100 year problem. And at 100 years exponentials swamp everything else.
- anthonyb 16y ago
  Your point being? CO2 emissions have been growing exponentially too: http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_vs_emissions.gif http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_vs_emissions.gif and the longer it gets put off, the more expensive it will be to fix.
  - InclinedPlane 16y ago
    That looks rather linear. Per capita Carbon emissions in developed countries have actually leveled off over the past several decades, though per capita GDP continues to rise. Assume for the moment that putting off addressing global warming will make the consequences more costly to address. How much more costly do they have to be to justify the sort of spending and sacrifices it would take today to curb Carbon emissions sharply? In 100 years Bangladeshis and Indonesians will likely be richer than Americans today. What problems could they face which would justify sacrifices today in order to save such comparatively more wealthy and technologically advanced folks from them?
    - anthonyb 16y ago
      Looks exponential to me. Particularly from 1999 on, where there's a sharp upturn. The developed countries emissions are flattening because a large proportion of their production is being outsourced to China: http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=en_atm_co2e_pc&idim=country:CHN&dl=en&hl=en&q=chinese+carbon+emissions#met=en_atm_co2e_pc&idim=country:CHN http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=en_atm_co... The main issue is that we may not have 100 years - that's just a figure that Lomborg has come up with, and his figures are doubted by a lot of climate scientists. Somewhere around 2degC (over 1999 levels) is about the point where we might start to see positive feedback and serious effects from warming. At our current rate, we'll hit that in about 2040-2050. 5degC is certainly possible by 2100, which means no glaciers/fresh water in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh, desertification, food shortages and a couple of metres of sea level rise.

InclinedPlane 16y ago

This isn't just a 10 year problem, it's a 100 year problem. And at 100 years exponentials swamp everything else.

anthonyb 16y ago
Your point being? CO2 emissions have been growing exponentially too: http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_vs_emissions.gif http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_vs_emissions.gif and the longer it gets put off, the more expensive it will be to fix.
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  That looks rather linear. Per capita Carbon emissions in developed countries have actually leveled off over the past several decades, though per capita GDP continues to rise. Assume for the moment that putting off addressing global warming will make the consequences more costly to address. How much more costly do they have to be to justify the sort of spending and sacrifices it would take today to curb Carbon emissions sharply? In 100 years Bangladeshis and Indonesians will likely be richer than Americans today. What problems could they face which would justify sacrifices today in order to save such comparatively more wealthy and technologically advanced folks from them?
  - anthonyb 16y ago
    Looks exponential to me. Particularly from 1999 on, where there's a sharp upturn. The developed countries emissions are flattening because a large proportion of their production is being outsourced to China: http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=en_atm_co2e_pc&idim=country:CHN&dl=en&hl=en&q=chinese+carbon+emissions#met=en_atm_co2e_pc&idim=country:CHN http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=en_atm_co... The main issue is that we may not have 100 years - that's just a figure that Lomborg has come up with, and his figures are doubted by a lot of climate scientists. Somewhere around 2degC (over 1999 levels) is about the point where we might start to see positive feedback and serious effects from warming. At our current rate, we'll hit that in about 2040-2050. 5degC is certainly possible by 2100, which means no glaciers/fresh water in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh, desertification, food shortages and a couple of metres of sea level rise.