4 ms·

The elephant in the room, which nobody seems to mention, is that the real price after adjusting for externalities like the climate crisis (largely caused by the

by jwr 7y ago

The elephant in the room, which nobody seems to mention, is that the real price after adjusting for externalities like the climate crisis (largely caused by the burning of fossil fuels), should probably be closer to $10/gallon or even more. I find it strange that we still have articles which discuss the new interesting arrangements for chairs on the deck of our Titanic.

hootbootscoot 7y ago
the first sentient lifeform I have seen here today! yay! thank you. you bring me hope.
chrisco255 7y ago
The climate crisis being what exactly, other than hyperbole? It's 2019. Not one month this year has been higher than the highs of 1998. Over 30 years have passed since the global warming hypothesis was presented and we have yet to see runaway global warming. Northern hemisphere snowfall totals are more than one standard deviation above average, presently. https://globalcryospherewatch.org/satellites/trackers.html https://globalcryospherewatch.org/satellites/trackers.html There was exceptional amounts of snow in 2018 across the northern hemisphere: https://m.phys.org/news/2018-03-exceptionally-large-amount-winter-northern.html https://m.phys.org/news/2018-03-exceptionally-large-amount-w... We are on track for similar if not higher levels of snow this year. That being said, you should worry more about cold temperatures than warm temperatures, because cold temps destroy crops.
- pintxo 7y ago
  Guess you did not read the linked articles? From the second (the first is purely about the technical measurements): > „... Examination over a longer period (1980-2017) shows that the total amount of snow in all winter periods has decreased on average. The ice cover on the Arctic Ocean has grown thinner and the amount and expanse of perennial ice has decreased. [...] Extreme weather phenomena including winters in which snowfall is quite heavy, and periods of little snow, will increase in the future. The Arctic area is warming at twice the speed as the rest of the world, and the impact of climate change can already be seen in the Arctic regions. And the changes are affecting the rest of the Earth.
  - chrisco255 7y ago
    I guess you didn't hear about the little ice age scare in the 70s? Take Leonard Nimoy's word for it: https://youtu.be/mOC7ePWCHGk https://youtu.be/mOC7ePWCHGk hard to argue with Spock. It's not surprising that ice loss occurred over the last few decades. Is this unprecedented in geological history? Not at all. The medieval warm period from 950-1250 was as warm as today if not warmer. It was followed by a little ice age that lasted 600 years, followed by the modern warming period which began in 1850, well before internal combustion engines took off. The loss or gain of ice in the Arctic occurs regularly. It's been happening in spurts since the end of the last glacial period 20,000 years ago. There are natural cycles like the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation that have a huge influence on Arctic ice extent.
    - pintxo 7y ago
      According to [1] we are already way beyond the temperatures of the medieval warm period. So not sure your argument holds. Also, apparently this effect was localized, not global. I guess there is no one disputing that Earth climate is driven by multiple sources, so that’s not the point. The question is: are we driving climate change to a large enough extend that we could have an impact on it by changing what we do? And the consensus seems to be a strong yes. The other question is: is climate change a net negative? And again the answer seems to be a strong yes. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period
    - pintxo 7y ago
      Another point, we need no ICEs to create excess co2. Simply burning coal and wood is enough, and by 1850 we had been doing this for centuries.
    - tekproxy 7y ago
      Science denier! Burn the heretic! /s
- jwr 7y ago
  I don't think we should respond to trolls. Science agrees: we are in a climate crisis, which is human-caused. There is no longer a point in discussing this with amateur arguments, similarly to there being no point in discussing that the earth is round. It is a waste of everyone's time. What I also find bizarre is that even if the climate crisis were not true, reducing fossil fuel consumption would be good for people, if only because of less pollution. So why would anyone in their right mind fight it?

by jwr 7y ago

hootbootscoot 7y ago

the first sentient lifeform I have seen here today! yay! thank you. you bring me hope.

chrisco255 7y ago

The climate crisis being what exactly, other than hyperbole? It's 2019. Not one month this year has been higher than the highs of 1998. Over 30 years have passed since the global warming hypothesis was presented and we have yet to see runaway global warming. Northern hemisphere snowfall totals are more than one standard deviation above average, presently. https://globalcryospherewatch.org/satellites/trackers.html https://globalcryospherewatch.org/satellites/trackers.html There was exceptional amounts of snow in 2018 across the northern hemisphere: https://m.phys.org/news/2018-03-exceptionally-large-amount-winter-northern.html https://m.phys.org/news/2018-03-exceptionally-large-amount-w... We are on track for similar if not higher levels of snow this year. That being said, you should worry more about cold temperatures than warm temperatures, because cold temps destroy crops.

pintxo 7y ago
Guess you did not read the linked articles? From the second (the first is purely about the technical measurements): > „... Examination over a longer period (1980-2017) shows that the total amount of snow in all winter periods has decreased on average. The ice cover on the Arctic Ocean has grown thinner and the amount and expanse of perennial ice has decreased. [...] Extreme weather phenomena including winters in which snowfall is quite heavy, and periods of little snow, will increase in the future. The Arctic area is warming at twice the speed as the rest of the world, and the impact of climate change can already be seen in the Arctic regions. And the changes are affecting the rest of the Earth.
- chrisco255 7y ago
  I guess you didn't hear about the little ice age scare in the 70s? Take Leonard Nimoy's word for it: https://youtu.be/mOC7ePWCHGk https://youtu.be/mOC7ePWCHGk hard to argue with Spock. It's not surprising that ice loss occurred over the last few decades. Is this unprecedented in geological history? Not at all. The medieval warm period from 950-1250 was as warm as today if not warmer. It was followed by a little ice age that lasted 600 years, followed by the modern warming period which began in 1850, well before internal combustion engines took off. The loss or gain of ice in the Arctic occurs regularly. It's been happening in spurts since the end of the last glacial period 20,000 years ago. There are natural cycles like the Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation that have a huge influence on Arctic ice extent.
  - pintxo 7y ago
    According to [1] we are already way beyond the temperatures of the medieval warm period. So not sure your argument holds. Also, apparently this effect was localized, not global. I guess there is no one disputing that Earth climate is driven by multiple sources, so that’s not the point. The question is: are we driving climate change to a large enough extend that we could have an impact on it by changing what we do? And the consensus seems to be a strong yes. The other question is: is climate change a net negative? And again the answer seems to be a strong yes. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_Warm_Period
  - pintxo 7y ago
    Another point, we need no ICEs to create excess co2. Simply burning coal and wood is enough, and by 1850 we had been doing this for centuries.
  - tekproxy 7y ago
    Science denier! Burn the heretic! /s
jwr 7y ago
I don't think we should respond to trolls. Science agrees: we are in a climate crisis, which is human-caused. There is no longer a point in discussing this with amateur arguments, similarly to there being no point in discussing that the earth is round. It is a waste of everyone's time. What I also find bizarre is that even if the climate crisis were not true, reducing fossil fuel consumption would be good for people, if only because of less pollution. So why would anyone in their right mind fight it?