To worry that the planet is heating faster than we have been led to expect and whether we can cope?

[100thingstoknowaboutspace]

I understand that extreme weather events, including spikes in temperatures and longer heatwaves, are a result of smaller incremental rises in global temperature. But the rate of heat records and large jumps in the temperatures during those spikes and heatwaves that we have experienced during the last 10 years feels off the scale for me, and I am wondering how we can actually cope if it continues at this pace? Climate experts talk about 2 degrees warming by mid century, but if we experience heatwaves that are 5 or more degrees hotter or go on longer than this one, I genuinely don't understand how we will cope. At the moment my flat is only just tolerable - with every measure of cooling I could think of. A few degrees more, and survival is literally threatened. Whereas humans may be able to cope with 5, 10 etc degrees lower, as it is easier to heat up, it seems we are reaching the edge of survivability in terms of being able to stay cool enough to maintain life. Not only here in the UK obviously.

I do believe there is still action that we as individuals and as a country (which in turn may impact other countries) can take, but I am scared that things are worse than even experts, in their carefully hedged or caveated statements and predictions, cause us to believe. I am worried I won't be able to keep my child safe as they grow up.

Grateful if anyone can talk me down from this climate anxiety - and also, grateful for insight about what might be most effective for us to do.

Very clear, thank you.

Going nuclear is no solution.
As France learnt this week, when they had to shut down several nuclear power stations because of the high temperatures and the lack of water at a suitable temperature for cooling (it was too warm).

And that's without the long-term issues around how you deal with the nuclear waste.

The energy used in production isn't that much actually, they'll have generated the equivalent in clean energy back within a couple of years.

Solar panels last a lot longer than 20 years. They're often still in warranty until 30 years and are quite likely to still be at 80% output for another decade after that.

Oh, and 95% of their materials can be recycled. They're 78% glass, 10% aluminium - two of the most recyclable materials on the planet.

Where do you get all of this drivel from?

You can reach the whole of Europe, several African countries, and (if you're feeling particularly adventurous) even East Asia without flying.

French nuclear power stations are mostly along rivers. Ours used the sea for cooling, other than Trawsfynnyd that had a reservior and a couple which had cooling towers. The sea holds a little more water for cooling than even the largest rivers in France, so our nuclear power stations had no issues.

Works for a fossil fuel company, perhaps? I've found that people who do, often talk down any of the less destructive alternatives.

Or just using twenty-year-old data. The tech has improved even since we got ours in 2011, after all.

More likely to be a Daily Mail reader, I think

Incomplete data to work from for certain, if so.

Hey, do solar panels cause cancer? (grin)

I can highly recommend magnesium balm.

It's not only just that the tech has improved (although it has). It's also that 20 years ago solar panels hadn't been in (widespread) use for 20 years so it was harder to know how how long their likely lifespan was. Now we can point to solar panels that are 20 or even 30 years old and still going strong.

Yes. Well, ours are, but they are nothing like that old. We were going to install some anyway after moving into a new home we planned to stay in for a while, and then the beneficent powers that were offered us a really good feed-in tariff bribe. Which as far as I know we are still getting.

Yup. It's a bit odd that some folk are saying there is a low recycling rate when they have really just been in ramping up mass production for a few years.

Graph attached. Just in 2005 it was practically zero.

Data here :

Installed solar energy capacity (ourworldindata.org)

It must be particularly difficult these days for Government's to know what type of technology to commit long term investment to, due to the pace of innovation?

Why would you want to try though? It might be greener than flying but it’s still not great and frankly someone has to offset all the MNers who seem to go abroad several times a year.

It's the same with recycling the batteries in electric cars. It needs to happen (some of the material used is super expensive and quite hard to extract. Plus has environmental costs to extraction but if you are recycling it's a one of cost effectively). But electric car batteries aren't reaching the end of their lifetimes en masse yet so we don't yet have a recycling industry in place for them. Unlike aluminium etc, noone in their right mind would be chucking batteries in regular rubbish anyway so it shouldn't require a huge behaviour change (obviously some people do that with smaller batteries because they're twats who dont care about refuse collectors)

There are issues around making it easier to recycle solar panels/wind turbines etc. effectively if there is no standardised production it's harder to automate recycling processes. But that's also partly because they are newer technologies. Standardisation comes at the expense of innovation so for new tech you expect and want a wide variety of types until it consolidates.around a standard form that works best.

For sure. Recycling is much like manufacturing. It needs scale to be cost effective and profitable.

And of course, because scale really needs centralised facilities, that will be the next thing the climate change deniers will be on about. The shipping of stuff around the world to re-cycling plants.

Have you no sense of adventure? I've been all the way to Malta by train and ferry, all the way to Helsinki, Istanbul etc. Had a fantastic time and all for a tiny impact compared with flying.

Well good for you. People enjoy different things and I don’t want to spend my time or money doing that. It’s nothing to do with a sense of adventure.

Which was the politician who said he never went by public transport because he'd have to sit next to people, or something of the sort?

I admit, I generally drive to my destination (and use ferries) rather than go by train, even though the trains on the continent were almost infinitely better than ours in every respect last time I used them; it was spoiled by the French suddenly calling a strike and our having to spend a day in the Gare du Nord and miss the ferry we'd booked home. We passed the time counting all the different sorts of armed French police patrolling the platform trying not to look silly.

I wouldn't consider the trains in France to be particularly better than ours, especially once you get away from the TGV routes. In Germany, Deutsche Bahn is a national joke. Switzerland and the Netherlands however are top tier.

@100thingstoknowaboutspace : check out this book - www.penguin.co.uk/books/453652/not-the-end-of-the-world-by-ritchie-hannah/9781529931242

Yes, we are facing problems. But a lot of good stuff is also happening.

Humans will eventually die out unless they colonise other planets. The planet will continue for far longer. There’s literally nothing we can do to change it or slow it down at this stage as the main players aren’t on board. It’s too late anyway so why worry about it. All you can do is migrate to cooler climes now.

It would be the best thing for the planet and the environment if the species did die out. I’m seeing the declining birth rate as a positive. A couple of generations of economic crisis in capitalist systems and then no more.

(Disclaimer - I’m GenX and stereotypically nihilistic)

I tend to agree that on an individual level our efforts are but a small drop in the ocean. Also yes to considering cooler climates when relocating.

I havent read the whole thread so not sure if the vast data centres that are being built globally have been discussed? Just on our small island the scale and number of these things being planned is huge. Each one requiring so much energy and water. Why is it that global leaders seem absolutely fine about these centres in terms of climate change?

Governments in general are not OK with it. With the UK government they want them powered by renewables. It is all in their plan, and it goes hand in hand. Data center investment also needs them to do renewable investment.

The US however, Trump wants coal fired stations.