Pages

Jump to bottom

5 comments

1 Interesting Times  Mon, Nov 15, 2010 4:23:10pm

How much longer do we have before the "bullet to the head" tipping point?

2 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Nov 15, 2010 4:32:00pm

re: #1 publicityStunted

How much longer do we have before the "bullet to the head" tipping point?

I don't know. There are many tipping points to be looked at actually.

They also reinforce each other. It could be that crossing a methane tipping point means we are doomed to cross an oceanic tipping point.

I would guess that we have decades at best and years at worst. While there are some that claim we have already passed them, I think we are likely in better shape than that.

3 freetoken  Mon, Nov 15, 2010 6:07:23pm

One of the counter arguments comes from the peak-oil/peak-coal communities. They argue that we have much less economically viable fossil fuels than many have presumed (including the IPCC.) Thus emissions are peaking this decade and will decline each decade following.

The counter-counter argument to that is that our civilization will be (in a couple of decades) so desperate for energy to maintain business as usual that we will attempt to burn even quite marginal fossil carbon deposits though the net energy output / energy input is barely = 1. Thus any lump of kerogen shale will be burnt and any glob of tar will be cracked.

All three scenarios end in doom:

1. BAU with lots of fossil fuels - back to the Cretaceous;
2. BAU desired but we've already consumed around half the fossil fuel resource - back just to the Pliocene and with imminent poverty;
3. BAU and burning anything that can burn - back to the Cretaceous with the continents looking like the Morlocks have taken over.

Now, one might hope that BAU is avoided because of due diligence and forethought.

Yet I have become quite discouraged of the world changing from BAU - the last 12 months has shown how powerful are: the psychology of sunk investments, the desire to get out of energy poverty, and social posturing.

Almost all evidence from the last 12 months points to BAU being the course of the near future.

4 Mad Prophet Ludwig  Mon, Nov 15, 2010 6:21:29pm

re: #3 freetoken

One of the counter arguments comes from the peak-oil/peak-coal communities. They argue that we have much less economically viable fossil fuels than many have presumed (including the IPCC.) Thus emissions are peaking this decade and will decline each decade following.

The counter-counter argument to that is that our civilization will be (in a couple of decades) so desperate for energy to maintain business as usual that we will attempt to burn even quite marginal fossil carbon deposits though the net energy output / energy input is barely = 1. Thus any lump of kerogen shale will be burnt and any glob of tar will be cracked.

All three scenarios end in doom:

1. BAU with lots of fossil fuels - back to the Cretaceous;
2. BAU desired but we've already consumed around half the fossil fuel resource - back just to the Pliocene and with imminent poverty;
3. BAU and burning anything that can burn - back to the Cretaceous with the continents looking like the Morlocks have taken over.

Now, one might hope that BAU is avoided because of due diligence and forethought.

Yet I have become quite discouraged of the world changing from BAU - the last 12 months has shown how powerful are: the psychology of sunk investments, the desire to get out of energy poverty, and social posturing.

Almost all evidence from the last 12 months points to BAU being the course of the near future.

You may be right. We still need to try to convince people. If poeple do not get a clue about this, then we really are doomed.

The technology does exist to prevent the worst of it.

5 HypnoToad  Mon, Nov 15, 2010 9:02:21pm

I was in the skeptic camp for quite some time and changed my opinion. I think that there might actually be somewhat of a backlash developing to the anti science views being promoted recently. If they were just denying AGW, people might be accepting of their arguments without looking at it closely. But by questioning AGW, biology, the age of the Earth, and the astronomy, chemistry and physics that provide supporting evidence, they are assaulting all of science. Even a lot of laymen will notice that these people want to take us back to the 1800s. Many average people don't understand, or even fear, science because they don't have the background or time to learn about it. This dosn't mean that they don't understand its value, or see the improvements in life it brings. Of course, there will always be those with rigid beliefs that can never be changed, but they will become increasingly isolated.


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Best of April 2024 Nothing new here but these are a look back at the a few good images from the past month. Despite the weather, I was quite pleased with several of them. These were taken with older lenses (made from the ...
William Lewis
Yesterday
Views: 128 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 4
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
3 weeks ago
Views: 391 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1