Food for thought, and it's not about Kids conversing on the Internet --
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/infant-information-revolution-by-joseph-s--nye-2018-06
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/facebook-european-union-data-protection-by-jeffrey-d-sachs-2018-04
And back "on topic," here's a great article on Global Warming --
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/12/opinion/earth-will-survive-we-may-not.html
Yes zborg - (re last link) we are just a blip. The planet has 'got' humans like you or I might have a fungal infection 
Also, I'm coming to think that certain business people are banking on geo-engineering as a way out of our problems, A risky strategy that someone will no doubt be able to make huge sums from. Just a feeling - but seeing what else our species has done not so far fetched. If a massive change in energy policy is not forthcoming in the next 10 years or so we probably won't have much choice but to roll the dice,
Way too far fetched. Any idea on how much energy it would take to control the climate?
Well some of the proposed ideas have some merit. For example afforestation - planting lots of trees and presumably not cutting them down in the first place. I don't know how much carbon that would lock up but at least it wouldn't have unintended side effects. More risky ideas include introducing stratospheric aerosols to reflect sunlight and therefore increase albedo.
Certainly we should look into these techniques but they have to be studied very carefully and not used as an excuse to just keep polluting with fossil fuels.
We could end up in a situation where companies are getting paid twice to pollute the atmosphere - once to burn fossil fuels and once to ameliorate the effects of them. Would then be far cheaper to just switch to renewables.
http://www.geoengineering.ox.ac.uk/what-is-geoengineering/what-is-geoengineering/
I'm coming to think that certain business people are banking on geo-engineering as a way out of our problems
I think you're giving them too much credit
I think you're giving them too much credit
I'm suggesting that these people are ruled by money and are prepared to take risks with our futures in order to get it. So, no, I don't think I'm giving them much credit at all. If it's the same people (making money from geo-engineering as made money from fossil fuels) that's like somebody selling you a car that they know will breakdown and then charging you to tow it away.
Having said that, some forms of geo-engineering may have some merit and might make a contribution to preventing co2 build up and temp rises. But they should be used in conjunction with a transfer to renewables not instead of them.
We were warned.
On June 23, 1988, a sultry day in Washington, James Hansen told Congress and the world that global warming wasn’t approaching — it had arrived. The testimony of the top NASA scientist, said Rice University historian Douglas Brinkley, was “the opening salvo of the age of climate change.”
Thirty years later, it’s clear that Hansen and other doomsayers were right. But the change has been so sweeping that it is easy to lose sight of effects large and small — some obvious, others less conspicuous.
Earth is noticeably hotter, the weather stormier and more extreme. Polar regions have lost billions of tons of ice; sea levels have been raised by trillions of gallons of water. Far more wildfires rage.
Over 30 years — the period climate scientists often use in their studies in order to minimize natural weather variations — the world’s annual temperature has warmed nearly 1 degree, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The temperature in the United States has gone up even more — nearly 1.6 degrees.
http://www.dispatch.com/news/20180618/30-year-old-global-warming-alerts-have-come-true-and-then-some
Sales of electric cars were up 54% globally in 2017, with Norway leading the way with 40% of the car market now being electric!
Norway plans to remove all fossil fuel powered vehicles from the roads in a few years, and is also working towards electric aircraft and electric ships.
I predict they will succeed.
The comments above regarding Geo-Engineering deserve more attention.
From another angle, here's a interesting yet (I suspect) controversial article about nuclear power by a physicist writing for Project Syndicate --
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/nuclear-power-climate-change-misconceptions-by-wade-allison-2018-06
I always thought the chief problem with nuclear power was what to do with the waste. Since I didn't read anything about nuclear waste in the link above, I conjecture his omission was deliberate.
I agree that negativity about nuclear is not fully justified by the facts. But, surprisingly, nuclear has quite a high carbon impact at present, due to the massive engineering involved. It is also only a short term solution, in terms of the future of mankind, and is one that leaves extremely unpleasant waste products that will cause problems (and harm) for thousands of years and longer.
Temperatures shot up over 110 degrees in Southern California on Friday, obliterating all kinds of long-standing heat records, and the lights went out for tens of thousands of customers. Californians were powerless, without air conditioning, in the hottest weather many had ever experienced.
Climate scientists have known this was coming, and it may only be the beginning.
“We studied this a long time ago . . . now our projections are becoming reality,” tweeted Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist at Texas Tech University.
In 2006, Hayhoe and colleagues published the study “Climate, Extreme Heat, and Electricity Demand in California” in the Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology.
@87
Yes, the fall in CFC levels is slowing and it appears China is responsible. They also break up old fridges which were made before the ban on CFCs. Lets hope China get their act together and live up to their international responsibilities. Ditto that for both China, the US and all nations on co2 and fossil fuels.
Anyway, good to see that during your 'rest' you have had an epiphany and now seem to accept that dumping chemicals into the atmosphere is a bad idea.
@SLL I wonder if anyone has done a study on how much extra air conditioning will be needed as temps rise. And how much that will add to emissions.
China using banned chemicals, ozone and agw concerns.
https://eia-international.org/wp-content/uploads/Blowing-It-final.pdf
Very informative document. The Chinese government needs to deal with this: there are no excuses. The problem is associated with the higher level of systemic corruption.
Is ammonia the answer to renewable energy storage?
A lot easier to handle than hydrogen, and an energy rich fuel that can be used in conventional engines.
Sales of electric cars were up 54% globally in 2017, with Norway leading the way with 40% of the car market now being electric!
Norway plans to remove all fossil fuel powered vehicles from the roads in a few years, and is also working towards electric aircraft and electric ships.
I predict they will succeed.
An ancient lake in South America, that millennia ago was at sea level, is now at the top of the Andes, carried there as a Pacific Ocean tectonic plate slides eastwards and beneath the South American tectonic plate, and so creating that continent's great mountain range,
With low temperatures, almost no rain, and lots and lots of time, the lake's mineral rich water has separated by weight into its constituent elements. (Think of a separation funnel)
Blanketing the lake is several square miles of that lightest of all metals: lithium.
It is thought there is enough almost pure lithium to power the planet's expected electric vehicles for at least seventy years. And that's just the surface layer...
But possibly best of all. this lake is in Colombia
The usual multi/trans national power companies have offered their 'help' to develop it, but they have all met with a firm rebuff.
The Colombian people will remain the sole owners and beneficiaries of this fantastic resource.
"The usual multi/trans national power companies have offered their 'help' to develop it, but they have all met with a firm rebuff.
The Columbian people will remain the sole owners and beneficiaries of this fantastic resource."
At least untill certain world leaders bomb them into submission.
And here's the latest use of "cost-benefit economics" to defend the use of coal fired plants for African and other developing country economies. You may not agree with it, but this article is a good example of the measure of the sophisticated resistance (from the right) to GCC and the UN-centric negotiations. Enjoy --
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/benefits-of-fossil-fuels-for-poor-people-by-bjorn-lomborg-2018-07
The global conspiracy of all of those who run weather stations. Now, there's a new one!