Anybody care about climate change around here?

I'm still trying to figure out the dynamics of this board.  I did a search and the newest climate change thread I could find was from over a year ago.  I found that shocking.

Is that a topic that anybody here cares about?  I know partisan bickering can be fun and all, but I'm surprised at the lack of discussion.

It seems like 2030-2040 is a sweet spot for a lot of climate model predictions.  Yes, there are some longer term 5C models for 2100 that are horrifically unimaginable, but there're some near term issues that we're going to have to deal with here shortly.

What are you doing to prepare, if anything?  If you live out west, do you worry about water shortages?  Wild fires?  If you live in the south, are you worried about the (seemingly) increasing impact of weather events?  Extreme record heat?  Are you confident that your power grid will survive the effects of climate change in the coming years?  Are you concerned about the fragility of the food supply?  If you live overseas, are you worried about a massive influx of climate refugees?  What about a climate driven collapse of society?

To be clear, I'm not debating climate change.  It's a thing.  It's happening.  It's going to get worse.  Politicians will not save us.  If you can't see that, please move on from this discussion.

But I'm also not approaching climate change from some kind of doomsday prepper angle, either.  I think there are small, subtle things that we, as individuals can do now to better prepare ourselves for the future.  Where we live.  How we get our food.  How we power our homes.  What skills we choose to learn and what hobbies might better place us in the future.  Even how much wealth you think you need to survive a climate change scenario.  I'd be very interested to hear if anyone else here has thought about it like that, and if so, what you've done to better your family's (possibly bleak) future?

All of us already have our seats secured on the Mars trip.

Motown Spartan wrote:All of us already have our seats secured on the Mars trip.

Unlike Trapper, I can usually tell when someone is being either humorous or sarcastic.

However, your joke raises an interesting topic all on its own. I could easily see colonization as a solution to some of the more severe climate change predictions. Again, some of the 5C 2100 models make living in a bubble on some random planet look pretty good.

But realistically, do you think humanity could ever accomplish that? I'm sure from a technology perspective, we could do it. But think of the levels of global cooperation that would be required. Think about the dynamics of the wealthy versus the poor in a situation like that. Even from an individual selection perspective - do we send dog walkers and baristas to a space colony when you could send welders and botanists?

Given how poorly we, as a planet, cooperate with each other over small things.... I don't see society being able to get to the point where we abandon x% of the population and start over somewhere else. If we could overcome those problems, it seems like we could have just solved the climate crisis in the first place.

I didn’t buy a house I wanted that was a little too close to water for long term comfort

I think at one time, ghost was worried about how climate change would impact his ability to create new characters on message boards.

Because the search function actually works on tSwill I generally find an exist thread on the topic of interest and add to it, instead of starting new threads.  When I was posting on Wells I hated that there were multiple threads on the same topic day after day after day...

You are asking what each of us is doing to prepare?

A few years ago, we installed geo-thermal heating and cooling both as a "thing we could do" and because our old farmhouse didn't have air conditioning which may be needed if it gets warm.

Have been thinking of installing solar to reduce our grid dependance but having pulled the trigger due to aesthetics and social pressures.

Been driving HEV's for years, when we buy again it will be an upgraded HEV or if we wait long enough a BEV.

As to your comments regarding politics not doing anything, my opinion is that is not correct.

Biden is making a difference on global warming issues where the US and local government can make a difference.  The bipartisan infrastructure act has money in to upgrade the electric grid and to jump start charging stations, to start with.

There are also other provisions which are climate related.

Biden has also been aggressive at changing the direction of the federal bureaucracy from Trump's "all fossil fuel all the time" to a "growth of renewables as fast as Congress will allow".

I see some hope for government actions, and really, if the government doesn't act, we are all screwed.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I didn’t buy a house I wanted that was a little too close to water for long term comfort

Could you even get adequate insurance? Was this to be a long term retirement place, or were you worried about the immediate future?

Cape Romano dome house just south of Marco island 1985-1992

Cape Romano dome house today.

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

Motown Spartan wrote:All of us already have our seats secured on the Mars trip.

Unlike Trapper, I can usually tell when someone is being either humorous or sarcastic.

However, your joke raises an interesting topic all on its own. I could easily see colonization as a solution to some of the more severe climate change predictions. Again, some of the 5C 2100 models make living in a bubble on some random planet look pretty good.

But realistically, do you think humanity could ever accomplish that? I'm sure from a technology perspective, we could do it. But think of the levels of global cooperation that would be required. Think about the dynamics of the wealthy versus the poor in a situation like that. Even from an individual selection perspective - do we send dog walkers and baristas to a space colony when you could send welders and botanists?

Given how poorly we, as a planet, cooperate with each other over small things.... I don't see society being able to get to the point where we abandon x% of the population and start over somewhere else. If we could overcome those problems, it seems like we could have just solved the climate crisis in the first place.

The lack of suitable planets to move to is the showstopper, and that is from a realistic technology point of view.

Mars, which is the closest to useful, is way too cold and more importantly lacks enough of an EM field to protect from cosmic radiation.

Unless physics has another huge breakthrough on how the universe works, which seems highly unlikely, human travel much beyond Mars is pretty much out of the question.

kingstonlake wrote:Cape Romano dome house today.

I mean, there's a lot more to that story than climate change. That is not just the result of sea level rising.

Trapper Gus wrote:Because the such function actually works on tSwill I generally find an exist thread on the topic of interest and add to it, instead of starting new threads. When I was posting on Wells I hated that there were multiple threads on the same topic day after day after day...

You are asking what each of us is doing to prepare?

A few years ago, we installed geo-thermal heating and cooling both as a "thing we could do" and because our old farmhouse didn't have air conditioning which may be needed if it gets warm.

Have been thinking of installing solar to reduce our grid dependance but having pulled the trigger due to aesthetics and social pressures.

Been driving HEV's for years, when we buy again it will be an upgraded HEV or if we wait long enough a BEV.

As to your comments regarding politics not doing anything, my opinion is that is not correct.

Biden is making a difference on global warming issues where the US and local government can make a difference. The bipartisan infrastructure act has money in to upgrade the electric grid and to jump start charging stations, to start with.

There are also other provisions which are climate related.

Biden has also been aggressive at changing the direction of the federal bureaucracy from Trump's "all fossil fuel all the time" to a "growth of renewables as fast as Congress will allow".

I see some hope for government actions, and really, if the government doesn't act, we are all screwed.

Interesting take on threads. Many boards get pissy when you bump really old stuff. But hey, I'm new, so please accept my apologies for this etiquette breach.

Have you been happy with your geothermal? How deep did they have to go? Does it work well? What temperature extremes has it seen?

If you're going to go with EVs, I'd definitely want solar. I think there's a big risk that the grid won't accommodate our needs as things get worse climate-wise.

As for the political side of it.... I don't share your optimism. We don't need Biden to do something. We needed Clinton, or Bush, or Reagan to do something. I think we're shuffling the deck chairs, now. Even if Biden is doing great things, another administration will come along and undo everything in a matter of years. The last few years have proven that there are 74M+ idiots in America who wouldn't blink twice about that happening. And heck, even if Biden does amazing things, who is his counterpart doing great things in India, Mongolia, Qatar, or China? It's a global problem, not a United States specific problem. A handful of countries by themselves can't solve this alone.

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I didn’t buy a house I wanted that was a little too close to water for long term comfort

Could you even get adequate insurance? Was this to be a long term retirement place, or were you worried about the immediate future?

Not even close to retirement- it didn’t seem like a great idea. The water wasn’t 100 feet away. It was 10 feet away. Even the slightest change could be a problem. Didn’t bother looking into insurance because if you have to invoke an insurance policy your shit has already been ruined and I like my shit

Maybe….

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.news-press.com/amp/1043559001

The study looked at years 2030, 2045, 2060, 2080 and 2100 using data from the National Climate Assessment and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Erika Spanger-Siegfried, a climate and energy analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists, said areas like Marco Island will be inundated by 2060 and that the island will be practically under water and useless by 2100.

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:Because the such function actually works on tSwill I generally find an exist thread on the topic of interest and add to it, instead of starting new threads.  When I was posting on Wells I hated that there were multiple threads on the same topic day after day after day...

You are asking what each of us is doing to prepare?

A few years ago, we installed geo-thermal heating and cooling both as a "thing we could do" and because our old farmhouse didn't have air conditioning which may be needed if it gets warm.

Have been thinking of installing solar to reduce our grid dependance but having pulled the trigger due to aesthetics and social pressures.

Been driving HEV's for years, when we buy again it will be an upgraded HEV or if we wait long enough a BEV.

As to your comments regarding politics not doing anything, my opinion is that is not correct.

Biden is making a difference on global warming issues where the US and local government can make a difference.  The bipartisan infrastructure act has money in to upgrade the electric grid and to jump start charging stations, to start with.

There are also other provisions which are climate related.

Biden has also been aggressive at changing the direction of the federal bureaucracy from Trump's "all fossil fuel all the time" to a "growth of renewables as fast as Congress will allow".

I see some hope for government actions, and really, if the government doesn't act, we are all screwed.

Interesting take on threads.  Many boards get pissy when you bump really old stuff.  But hey, I'm new, so please accept my apologies for this etiquette breach.

Have you been happy with your geothermal?  How deep did they have to go?  Does it work well?  What temperature extremes has it seen?

If you're going to go with EVs, I'd definitely want solar.  I think there's a big risk that the grid won't accommodate our needs as things get worse climate-wise.  

As for the political side of it.... I don't share your optimism.  We don't need Biden to do something.  We needed Clinton, or Bush, or Reagan to do something.  I think we're shuffling the deck chairs, now.  Even if Biden is doing great things, another administration will come along and undo everything in a matter of years. The last few years have proven that there are 74M+ idiots in America who wouldn't blink twice about that happening.  And heck, even if Biden does amazing things, who is his counterpart doing great things in India, Mongolia, Qatar, or China?  It's a global problem, not a United States specific problem.  A handful of countries by themselves can't solve this alone.

Don't know what people consider board etiquette, I have seen people who have actively been around doing this, I just copied them.  My comment was more informational than critical.  No one has ragged on me for doing it.

We have been satisfied with the geo-thermal, there is another thread somewhere on here where I have "talked" about it.

For heat out here our options are propane, something electric, or burning something, like a pellet burner, what are somewhat popular also.  Geo-thermal is not only energy efficient, but also cheap to operate.  It paid for itself in about 4 years.  It has an "emergency" back up of all electric heat, which has never turned on.

They went down about 10 feet in our sheep pasture.  Our neighbor's ran theirs out into their pond.

Went with HEV's because we need a "truck like" vehicle for the winter, when our road gets plowed last, and the E-Series window vans we were driving, while practical with kids and remarkably able to plow through drifts, also were between 12 to 16 mpg.  The HEV's doubled that, plus, back in "07" when we began to switch.

It is well known the grid needs upgrading, with or without higher loads.  What is less well known is that much of the time it is operating way below capacity.  Sure, the days when it fails are there, and that is why upgrading is required, among other reasons.  The already passed Infrastructure Act has funds and laws to help make that happen.  Beyond that, economics will drive the upgrading, both insurance claims against failures & the rapidly dropping costs of renewable generation.  Companies are not building new coal plants and are retiring existing ones.  NG plants are being off lined this year because of operating costs.  Renewables were the second highest source of electricity in the US in 2020 & 2021.  The cost per kW is so low this is pretty much enviable, and btw. new grids have been being built to enable this, without the money or regulatory help from the governments.  The government acts will only speed this up, not create it.

Saying that it is too late is defeatism, and we must do what we can with what we have, not sit and mope about lost opportunities.  As for others undoing things, vote against them when they run.

It is a handful of countries which have created and continue to be the creators of many environmental issues.  Top amount those are the US, China, India and the EU together.  If those get to a no carbon economy, it will help greatly, since most of the carbon comes from these places.  All of these, thorough the actions of their governments are working towards this and will continue to do so.  Most countries don't have the onery know-nothings that the US is blessed with, so their progress is more orderly.

kingstonlake wrote:Maybe….

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.news-press.com/amp/1043559001

The study looked at years 2030, 2045, 2060, 2080 and 2100 using data from the National Climate Assessment and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Erika Spanger-Siegfried, a climate and energy analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists, said areas like Marco Island will be inundated by 2060 and that the island will be practically under water and useless by 2100.

I don't disagree with you. But the Cape Romano dome houses were built on what was basically a shoal that was being eroded by the natural currents of the Gulf of Mexico and hurricane activity. The original structures have basically sunk as the sandy shoal was being eroded. The sea level would have to have risen about 10 feet for that to have happened due to sea level rise.

I keep telling my kids, buy as much acreage in the UP with waterfront and running streams as can and move there in the next 10 years.

Motown Spartan wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:Maybe….

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.news-press.com/amp/1043559001

I don't disagree with you. But the Cape Romano dome houses were built on what was basically a shoal that was being eroded by the natural currents of the Gulf of Mexico and hurricane activity. The original structures have basically sunk as the sandy shoal was being eroded. The sea level would have to have risen about 10 feet for that to have happened due to sea level rise.

I lived there in the mid 90’s. I knew the sea level hadn’t risen to the level to justify the picture. It was more for effect. Crazy they let the dude build them to begin with. Ironically it’s now beaming with marine life.

Rick Saunders wrote:

Bredo Morstoel wrote:

As for the political side of it.... I don't share your optimism.  We don't need Biden to do something.  We needed Clinton, or Bush, or Reagan to do something.  I think we're shuffling the deck chairs, now.  Even if Biden is doing great things, another administration will come along and undo everything in a matter of years. The last few years have proven that there are 74M+ idiots in America who wouldn't blink twice about that happening.  And heck, even if Biden does amazing things, who is his counterpart doing great things in India, Mongolia, Qatar, or China?  It's a global problem, not a United States specific problem.  A handful of countries by themselves can't solve this alone.

Bob isn't here yet so allow me:

America is a stupid country.  Sadly, also often smarter than many.

It didn't have to be political.  It was made political.  Reagan and Clinton should have done more but it comes down to the idiots like me (you too Bob) who didn't have the will to do anything.

The USA role in WWII was political right up until it was obvious that we'd be involved.  Then pretty much everyone came together with a common purpose.  That took the will of the people at that point.

The Apollo program was highly controversial and extremely expensive but somehow as a nation we were able to get it done.  Those in opposition had and have a point in their opposition but they didn't take the position that they'd burn it all down to prevent it.  That took the vision and will of a leader.

We need both the will of a leader and the will of the people.  Climate change is absolutely a threat to our kids but people like me (boomers) have willfully chosen not to do anything about it.  In 1990 renewable energy could have been another moonshot and we'd be the leaders. NASA was over 4% of the US budget in 1966.  Doesn't CO2 meet that level of importance?

Well we should still take the moonshot including catalytic CO2 capture on a massive scale.  We aren't going to beat everybody and control the economy for another 30 years like we could have though.

What to do about concrete.    Hmmm

Just me venting ...

It erks me when people blame the boomers for the problems of the country, today.

Reagan was an adult before 1940, hardly a boomer, and the boomers were not the voting majority when he was elected.

Clinton was arguable the first Boomer President, but if he was born after 1944, it wasn't by much.

Before the cold war ended, 1990, the US had much more pressing threats on its mind.  Nuclear Armageddon for one.

However, the Boomers did politic for and achieve a semblance of a clean environment, with the Clean Air & Water Acts, signed by President Nixon, which was no small achievement by itself.  It worked so well that those younger than boomers seem to think that it has always been this clean.

The real warnings on Global Warming on a public scale were started, politically at least by a boomer who is the butt of endless jokes, Al Gore.  That was only 25 years ago.  People have been working on it ever since.

The boomers are the ones who until the last few years devoted careers to developing greener technologies, marketed those technologies, sold those technologies and bought those technologies.  40 years plus of engineering development greatly improved IC engines and controls so they burn as cleanly as possible for a mass-produced product.  Mostly boomer, and pre-boomer engineering efforts.

Heck Joe Biden isn't a boomer, he is too old, and he is also working to solve the problem.

So, stop putting the blame on one generation.  That generation saw the problem, pushed hard to publicize the problem, helped create solutions for the problem and continues to support solving the problem.  

These problems are not caused by one generation or a different generation, and they are not solved by one generation either.

okay, end of rant, thanks for reading

Bredo Morstoel wrote:
However, your joke raises an interesting topic all on its own. I could easily see colonization as a solution to some of the more severe climate change predictions. Again, some of the 5C 2100 models make living in a bubble on some random planet look pretty good.

If we have the technology to make a liveable bubble on an inhospitable planet, we might as well just deploy it on our increasingly inhospitable earth.

Not to say that colonizing other planets isn't desirable for myriad other reasons, but I've never viewed it as an answer to climate change.

Rick Saunders wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:g

Excellent venting.  Did you do it through a carbon scrubber?

Look, you're right.  Biden isn't a boomer and boomers are not solely responsible as a generation for all of society's ills.  And I'm a boomer as many of us are (seemingly a large number of 59-61 yr olds so we don't know how to use a slide rule and make excellent approximations as well as you, Trap.).

The fact is however that our generation has been a great bolus of electorate that has passed through electing Reagan and beyond and screaming lower taxes the whole way.  We are the generation that caused and stood blindly watching what was the political center in 1975 become the extreme left in 2022.  The rest of the world has moved one way taking our lead and the nation whose founders were all progressives turned around and moved the other way.  

Did we boomers do it alone?  Obviously not.  So I apologize for being lazy.

Those arrogant asses in the Big Chill told ya straight out loud.

That was a drama about entailed UofM AA's - and no, it is wrong about them too - just saying ...

The place I bought in 2013 came with a gas stove, which I'd never had before. I don't really want to go back.

[tw]1486687094613463054[/tw]

Floyd Robertson wrote:The place I bought in 2013 came with a gas stove, which I'd never had before. I don't really want to go back.

[tw]1486687094613463054[/tw]

Yeah, me neither. But a lot of folks out my way are big on replacing natural gas with electric. Cook top, driers, even home heating.

And now our local utility is asking for a rate hike to extend their natural gas coverage and people are losing their minds.

Such an odd time in which we all live.

Our local electric utility burns gas to create electricity. I'm keeping my gas stove.

kingstonlake wrote:

Ocean water temperatures have risen, too

This is kind of interesting. The first takeaway, if it's behind a paywall for you, is that the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee on Conservation, Climate, Forestry and Natural Resources is holding its first hearing in nine years.

How the **** does a Senate Subcommittee go nine years without meeting? It's not as if we don't occasionally like to eat or talk about agriculture.

Sen. Bennet warns of 'five-alarm crisis for the American West'

Second, putting that rhetorical question aside, what does the American west think it can do about their drought?

Certainly they're working on conservation efforts, and I've read some articles recently about how they're banning washing your car in your driveway and watering your lawn, but what's after that?

Every time the west starts talking about water I get nervous.

Good luck with the climate refugees.

Khanna’s belief that Michigan is the best place for climate driven migration begs the question of where. Michigan covers 98,000 square miles. The state’s north to south length runs 450 miles from the Upper Peninsula to the area around Detroit.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topstories/flee-to-michigan-as-soon-as-possible/ar-AA11aAlH

Floyd Robertson wrote:This is kind of interesting. The first takeaway, if it's behind a paywall for you, is that the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee on Conservation, Climate, Forestry and Natural Resources is holding its first hearing in nine years.

How the **** does a Senate Subcommittee go nine years without meeting? It's not as if we don't occasionally like to eat or talk about agriculture.

Sen. Bennet warns of 'five-alarm crisis for the American West'

Second, putting that rhetorical question aside, what does the American west think it can do about their drought?

Certainly they're working on conservation efforts, and I've read some articles recently about how they're banning washing your car in your driveway and watering your lawn, but what's after that?

Every time the west starts talking about water I get nervous.

Water from the Mississippi.

Saw on piece about Poyang Lake, the largest freshwater lake in China rapidly shrinking in the last 12 months due to the unprecedented heat wave.

It’s serious shit. Major employers including component manufacturing for electronics, automotive and appliance are working reduced hours because China’s hydro production been cut.

https://apnews.com/article/china-lakes-droughts-climate-and-environment-a8a9278e0bf6ea53f9e3de49d0446f64

I've been watching the water level at Otsego Lake dropping all summer, not sure why. The lake's source of water is basically rain and upper level level is controlled but evaporation with higher water temps is a possibility.

It’s not weather changes it’s the lawyers.

Several insurers have announced they are leaving Florida home insurance market including one based in St Petersburg Florida.

The state is hoping Citizens Insurance can replace some of the insurers leaving however in another report a new Citizens customer said before they would write a policy that cost over $1000 per year after a required home inspection he had to get several $1000 in repairs.

https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/price-of-paradise/united-p-c-to-pull-out-of-florida-homeowners-insurance-market

GRR Spartan wrote:It’s not weather changes it’s the lawyers.

Several insurers have announced they are leaving Florida home insurance market including one based in St Petersburg Florida.

The state is hoping Citizens Insurance can replace some of the insurers leaving however in another report a new Citizens customer said before they would write a policy that cost over $1000 per year after a required home inspection he had to get several $1000 in repairs.

https://www.abcactionnews.com/news/price-of-paradise/united-p-c-to-pull-out-of-florida-homeowners-insurance-market

Eventually Republicans will vote to have the other 49 states pick up the tab.

[tw]1570540923037319169[/tw]

WASHINGTON (AP) — As Speaker Kevin McCarthy visited a natural gas drilling site in northeast Ohio to promote House Republicans’ plan to sharply increase domestic production of energy from fossil fuels last month, the signs of rising global temperatures could not be ignored. Smoke from Canadian wildfires hung in the air.

When the speaker was asked about climate change and forest fires, he was ready with a response: Plant a trillion trees.

The idea — simple yet massively ambitious — revealed recent Republican thinking on how to address climate change. The party is no longer denying that global warming exists, yet is searching for a response to sweltering summers, weather disasters and rising sea levels that doesn’t involve abandoning their enthusiastic support for American-produced energy from burning oil, coal and gas.

https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-republicans-trillion-trees-01e455acce4397c0376e82bfa18b72c2

Once again deniers ignoring the science.

Studies have shown it is the ecology of forests, which trees are a part of but is much more complex than just "trees", which capture carbon.

Travelin Man.

Dude worked hard to create multiple screen names.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/7/25/2183371/-Climate-Change-A-recent-paper-in-the-journal-Nature-warns-of-a-major-change-in-Ocean-Currents

Short read about "the" oh shit event possibly happening soon.  The likely results are understated however.

Trapper Gus wrote:https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/7/25/2183371/-Climate-Change-A-recent-paper-in-the-journal-Nature-warns-of-a-major-change-in-Ocean-Currents

Short read about "the" oh shit event possibly happening soon.  The likely results are understated however.

This study assumes current policies are maintained. Which means that by aggressively pursuing policies to reduce green house gases like CO2 and methane we would be able to stall or even prevent a shutdown of the AMOC. We can accomplish these reductions if we as a society summon the will and political power to put them in place over the objections of greedy individuals and corporations.

Too bad 30% of this country's population is deadset against us ever being able to accomplish this.