"Reducing greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere in order to keep global warming under 1.5ºC or 2ºC could reduce the likelihood" of widespread drought, researchers concluded
Gee whiz but I can’t wait for Trump to make a ridiculously stupid remark in response to this. How do you meet forward looking goals for the environment when you have a backward looking president and Republican led government? If you want to stop this backward looking president and congress, we need to show up vote in huge numbers in 2018 to get Republicans out of control of congress and again in 2020 to defeat Trump’s predicted run for re-election. We can’t repeat the apathy toward voting of 2016 when America had its lowest percentage voter turn out in 70 years.
Trump is a gas emission therefore he is against reducing gas emissions.
Expect the worst. Hope is for suckers.
Happy New Year !!!
I wish you were wrong but the evidence is with you.
CLIMATE CHANGE IS A CHINESE HOAX! Too bad Trump will not be around to eat crow!
Out of curiosity, how many of you drove an internal-combustion-powered vehicle in the last, say, twenty-four hours? Or ate any food–especially meat–that was not locally produced? Or used an air-conditioner or a heater? A washing machine or dryer? Take a nice, hot shower? Fly in a plane recently? Buy some crap for someone that they didn’t need, just because it was “the holidays”?
It’s not just “them”. It’s “us” too.
Face it. We’re fucked.
Keep temps under 1.5 or 2 C? I’m sure it’s way too late for that. In related news, arctic sea ice extent just set a record low for Jan 1.
Great article warning us of these issues/facts for how many generations now? This article would lead one to believe that warnings of the 1.5°c, now upping to 2°c, are just beginning when in fact our seemingly useless Federal gov’t continues to feed the war machine trillions of dollars while neglecting the greatest battle to affect all mankind and life on Earth. If our government, “The problem, of course, is that the world’s second-largest emitter of carbon—the United States”, cannot find a way to put this urgent issue above all else, it is time to kick them (elected members) all out.
We use what science and technology have given us in this capitalistic age. Laws enacted, leadership provided and the funding necessary by our government can do the most good in changing all of the habits of the people of the world. This will not be solved one person or small community at a time. Too much time has been wasted.
We suffer from a global case of the tragedy of the commons, whereby each of us as individuals believes we can get away with our selfishness and think to ourselves, “really, how much damage can my puny consumption do?”
Too many capitalistic driven, selfish “wants” with their accompanying GHGs loads.
If carbon taxes were applied to beef in proportion to that industries GHG emissions, it would make a huge dent in the demand and the emissions.
I agree. I’m not blaming anyone who uses what capitalism has given us. It’s second nature for almost everyone, and no one is going to give them up at this point. Which is what is needed right now, en masse. And I’m not implying that if anyone does it will make a difference. That would be like thinking that using a ceramic mug at work will slow global warming. We are way too far down the rabbit hole at this point. Our problems won’t be solved politically, because politics is the problem.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. I have for too long heard some people say, "you use oil so don’t complain about Shell Oil, etc, drilling the oceans or fracking gas next to schools and neighborhoods. Only government has the power to say enough (with laws) to the corporations that are killing us. Government said no to drug dealing because of the damage done to society (there is more to it than that, I know) by that addiction/use. It can do the same to those who have us addicted to oil.
One of the reasons that I am deeply skeptical of being able to change this situation is not just that our governments are largely useless in this situation with their corruption and “too little, too late” approach to massive problems like this but that the level of ignorance and denial by the general public is depressing as hell. One example is something I found on YouTube. There was a testimony by global warming denier Dr. Judith Curry before some government panel and she hit all the bullet points about how global warming is a myth and that climate scientists are in cahoots to keep the hoax alive. It was crap as the website SkepticalScience proved. I recommend visiting that website, BTW. Anyway, I then scrolled down to the comments and OMG - it was a collection of the dumbest most ignorant opinions from people who clearly didn’t know what the hell they were talking about - just blabbing out the nonsense spewed by the right-wing media in this country. The people who disagreed with Curry were few and far between.
I’m sure that the deniers were cheering when that odious Mango Mussolini pulled the U.S.out of the Paris Climate Accord. Our stupidity shames us. It threatens our very futures and especially those of our children and grandchildren. What we will say to them?
The theory that co2 can have even a slight affect on our weather is indeed the hoax or the 21st century.
I wish I was wrong too Fascist. Sometimes I feel like I’m living in the matrix and am the only one to see what should in any rational reality, be obvious to all. The social programming of the populace has been staggeringly effective.
If it is any consolation you are not the only one. But yeah it does feel like we are cast into the corners while the deniers are at center stage.
Many people continue to make comparisons between petroleum and drugs production as if the two products are the same. Yes there are negative externalities associated with the two products, but what these people fail to recognize is that addictive drugs offer little to no benefit to society, while petroleum is responsible for 99.99% of all transportation fuels, as well as petrochemicals used in over 5,000 products that we as society in many cases require. To act as if oil and drugs like tobacco are the same is ridiculous when considering net benefits to society.
Its not just common people, but even well respected politicians. I once remember a senate hearing in which Senator Jeff Markley was talking about the harm of petroleum on crop production and he called for a complete termination of petroleum production. If you understand what petroleum is used for, this claim by the senator is very ironic. One of the most important uses of petrochemical is the production of hydrogen using steam reforming that requires methane and naphtha (a petrochemical). In the USA 99% of all hydrogen produced is made from fossil fuel processes. Now why is this important? Because when you combine nitrogen (which is also sometimes made from petrochemicals) and hydrogen you create ammonia which is essential for all fertilizers. What the Senator failed to recognize was that his plan would actually cause more environmental harm to crops than CO2 damage, as eliminating petrochemical production would drastically reduce to production of fertilizer.
Show me a person who believes that co2 and methane can have even a small influence on our weather and i will show you someone of huge gigantic and incomprehensible ignorance. The only arguement they can adduce to support their belief in global warming or climate change is …"“everybody says so , it must be true”" i have spent uncountable hours on the internet looking for the smallest scrap of evidence that such tiny amounts of co2 can have any affect whatsoever on our weather … And there is NONE. CO2 comprises only 1/25 of 1% of our air with methane at 1.8 parts per million. Nobody denies that co2 is a greenhouse gas, what we do deny is that such tiny amounts can have any affect at all. Then there is also the problem of weather averages and weather extremes. I live in the north central plains of N. America. I have carefully examined all the records going back to 1883. There is no doubt that we have cooler summers and warmer winters. Other extremes such as droughts, early frosts, floods etc all have been minimized and simply cannot remotely compare with the extremes preceding 1950 or even 1990. It appears we are an island of climate stability in a world wide ocean of climate upheaval… Or so the political propagandists would have us believe. Just one problem with that supposition. I have traded the grain markets for the past 36 years. As of today the world has never had so much wheat in storage as now. And corn and beans are not far behind. Crops have never been better all over the world. All the reported droughts and heat waves and floods are localized events and have not had the slightest minimizing affect on world wide crop production. Whatever the minor and insignificant changes in our climate has nothing to do with co2. Mistakenly demonizing co2 serves only to divert our attention from our real enemy which is POLLUTION in all of its many insidiously malignant and pernicious forms. Climatology and meteorology are very inexact sciences and are no more scientific than political science. 3 of the best guys proving the above are Don Easterbrook, Patrick Moore, and Coleman. Google them.and read them.
does the mirror shatter when you look at it? Or does it just get dark and misty and you hear the voice of Lucifer whispering, seductively, “yes! yes, my child. Make it burn!”
America is the world’s second-largest emitter of carbon and uses four earth’s worth of resources per individual because of the lifestyle of the average American living within it who seems to need more cars, devices, bigger houses, produce more waste, and consume more than people anywhere else in the rest of the world, so individuals are responsible in that respect. In a modern capitalist democracy citizens have two forms of power available to them, electoral power (their vote) and consumer power (what they chose to buy and utilise). If you’re really concerned about climate change switch your energy supplier to a green energy company, stop eating meat, use public transport instead of the driving everywhere, not necessarily because it will, in a tiny way, help the environment, (for as you pointed out that will be minimal, though evertything helps) but more because, with consumer power, by investing in these things you encourage them to flourish, make a profit and expand. A green energy company, for example, won’t even get off the ground if no one, even people concerned about these issues, don’t utilise it. To say, ‘I can’t do anything, it’s all the government’s fault, so I’ll carry on driving around in my big SUV, eating a burger and using dirty energy,’ is just a big cop out.