There Is No Plan

Nobody Reads This Blog

A Pavlovian Response To Global Warming

with 8 comments

First of all, let’s bring back the more precise description for what the world is experiencing. Yes, it’s “climate change”, but more specifically, it’s “global warming”. If you remember, “climate change” is a creation of the Bush spin team – it has the mark of Luntz on it ‘cos it’s so darned seamless, simple, insidious and clever – to offset the growing concern about how hot it’s getting here on Planet Earth.

Turns out he won. We need to point out that ‘change’ can be small, big, good or bad. So the term is about as useful as the, I don’t know, United States Congress.

Now onto the body of this post.

It’s pretty simple.

Global Warming isn’t just possible. It’s almost certain. The chances that we can reverse the onset of negative feedback that will lead to catastrophe are slim. Not because they’re not possible to avert, but because for us to stop them, we have to do stuff that requires all of us to change the way we live, eat, buy, sell, heat our homes, get around, power our electronic stuff, and make stuff, and make serious sacrifices in the process.

Not going to happen.

So what we need is to start creating agencies within say the UN (or a new world body that’s actually useful), and between national government, trading federations, and all the way down to communities, that start planning for the onset of disaster, and helping to mitigate and manage it Sea walls, insulation for homes, agricultural advances, national security planning, resource management, disease control. You name it.

And if we do that, people might actually respond.

If they see all these preparations for catastrophe, humans – being the funny contrarian bods they are – might say, why prepare for disaster? Why not try and avert it instead? Seems like the best way to deal with the problem before it’s too late.

Woof woof.


Written by coolrebel

October 23, 2011 at 7:19 am

Posted in Google

8 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I was thinking about that after I wrote my previous comment, but what was on my mind at the time were the plant and animal life that can live in contrast-able environments. If it's coming anyway, I'm at least interested to see how it will all be played out. In terms of our survival, green energy would be key both if the temperatures went up or down dramatically because using fossil fuels constantly to power our (at that point necessary) air conditioners/heaters would create large supply and demand issues, at least with green renewable energies such problems could be avoided.

    The area I live in has dozens of GE wind turbines installed, over 50 I'd say. Unfortunately I can't find the data for GE but I remember reading about comparable wind turbines by Siemens where they could engage at lower wind speeds at a reduced output. The reduced output at the minimum windspeed was about 60% still and I believe that was 20knots or about 23mph. Solar has been on the rise, and faced with the situation I think nuclear power couldn't hurt. I read about some 20MW self contained powerplants that would be buried in the ground and work for 15 years. After which they'd be dug up and the waste would be discarded like the other waste.

    This would provide an answer for people, however I have a feeling certain people or groups would band together and create 'arks' (so-to-speak) for the wildlife populations. Basically they'd be indoor climate controlled Zoo's. They would probably even operate in such a manner, selling tickets to provide funding for upkeep. Now if only we could work as hard as we did on a solution to the looming problem as we did on the atom bomb. That was a massive undertaking just for a bomb, imagine all the good that could have been done if comparable resources were used. +Kirk Eisele +Amy Correa +Simon Gornick

    Aaron Trent

    October 26, 2011 at 9:52 am

  2. +Aaron Trent Just a small point but an important one. Animals and insects can move quickly to matching weather. The problem with rapid climate change is that plants move slower. In the case of trees, very slowly through natural seed propagation. Much of the risk of rapid change isn't than animals/insects can't get out of the way. It is that when they get to where they are comfortable, the plants are all wrong and/or not doing well so the populations dependent on them decline or crash. That creates the risk of disrupting the established feedback loops in place and accelerating die-offs. The classic haves vs. have-nots will affect how much any individual needs to care on a personal level. I recommend being a “have” if at all possible!

    Kirk Eisele

    October 25, 2011 at 6:19 pm

  3. Also,+Aaron Trent, unfortunately no one really knows what will happen with carbon levels this high, the last time they were this high was the Cretaceous and there were no ice caps, rain forest/jungle everywhere. Climate change and the problems associated with it are not about the end of the planet or the end of life. It's more about the drastic changes to our lifestyle in the short run… agriculture, natural disasters, drought, potential shut down of the ocean's thermohaline system which could have drastic impacts to ocean life and weather patterns, killing off coral reefs, droughts snowpack and reservoirs we depend on for water, etc. It will likely turn into food and water shortages and super bad times for humans. The planet will be fine and will recover eventually, although the extinctions we caused will be immense. I doubt even disasters will be enough to change our course. Really the problem is the 1% doesn't want to pay to help with this… so there you have it… we are all screwed because of them 😦

    Amy Correa

    October 24, 2011 at 9:38 am

  4. +Simon Gornick I agree with you on suspicion of their motives. 🙂

    Amy Correa

    October 24, 2011 at 9:29 am

  5. Amy, you may well be right about the use of the less politically incendiary term 'climate change' being correct scientific usage, but I believe it was the Bush administration who inserted the phrase into common parlance, with all the advantages that entails in terms of messaging and public opinion. And considering their lack of love for science in general, I'd hazard a guess it was more for political reasons than in the pursuit of technical exactitude.

    Simon Gornick

    October 24, 2011 at 7:31 am

  6. +Aaron Trent I think over time you're absolutely right, Aaron. But the short term in this case may be centuries, so that's going to be cold comfort for many generations to come including my children, and theirs.

    Simon Gornick

    October 24, 2011 at 7:24 am

  7. Regardless of correct terminology, the sad part is that the changes we require won't be exacted until some sort of disaster is readily apparent or imminent. Which at that point would come down to the government finally doing as you suggested in hopes of mitigating the damage done. However I have a feeling this would only affect our way of life rather than completely destroy our world. Life likes to adapt, and I would imagine that's what will happen. Carbon-dioxide levels were much higher when the dinosaurs were around, with that abundance of CO2 came an abundance of Oxygen as well. With the abundance of both came larger plant and animal life. I don't think we'd just fill in the gap right away however I have a feeling we'd adapt just fine to it. Animals would probably just migrate. Of course this is all just my opinion on it based off things I've learned.

    Aaron Trent

    October 24, 2011 at 6:49 am

  8. Actually I thought the term climate change was one that scientists embraced years ago as more accurate than the more publicly used “global warming.” I took a lot of related classes on this for my masters and it's the more widely used term in journals and whatnot….

    Amy Correa

    October 23, 2011 at 8:12 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s