Incredibly sobering news: world set to warm by 2.9 - 3.4 degrees.

[chickychickyparmparm]

www.newscientist.com/article/2111263-world-is-set-to-warm-3-4c-by-2100-even-with-paris-climate-deal

:( When are we going to wake up to this? What is the UK doing?

[MrOod]

pennycarbonara Thanks for the recs. Familiar with archdruid. Pretty good, as is Dmitry Orlov.

[pennycarbonara]

Mistigri, but it's only Republican politicians (or a lot of them) that are stopping it being seen that way. As you probably already know, the Pentagon have treated it as such for some years, whilst the likes of James Inhofe - I think this is a paraphrased quote from him,can't find an article with it right now - say they should be focusing on "real threats" like conflict in the Middle East "instead", completely failing to see how it's all connected.

MrOod, someone just reminded me of another site along those lines which you would probably like: thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com

[Mistigri]

It is quite likely that climate change will come to be seen as a national security issue in the US in due course - although it may be too late by then.

In Europe we are already reaping the consequences of climate change, which is partly responsible for the refugee crisis. The current drought in parts of South America may mean that the US faces similar challenges in future.

[pennycarbonara]

And I think it is still reasonable to try and push for decent quality of life for as many as possible on the slide down. Government scale redistribution seems unlikely, but a) one can try, and b) the well off should be doing more to support those of their acquaintace who aren't; yes, Victorian style, because there wasn't much state support then and we're slowly going back that way.

[pennycarbonara]

Totally agree MrOod!
Except that I can't see the Dark Mountain crew fitting in too well at one of the Camerons' dinner parties...

[Tropezienne]

Excellent article and well worth a read. It isn't just Trump who is indifferent to climate change though. Far from it...

zcomm.org/znetarticle/trump-in-the-white-house/

[MrOod]

Earth has lost half of its species in the last 40 years.

Global fisheries are collapsing

Insect populations are collapsing

We are entering abrupt climate change

Notoriously alarmist left-wing lunatics The British Government predict civilisation will collapse in twenty three years.

The collapse is happening folks. Now. And we’re squabbling over whether to belong to Europe, or if Corbyn wears a nice suit or whether Bake Off will survive the transition. Personally I prefer to face it dead on. When you face death, the death of anything, the death of a relative say, rather than shunt it under the carpet, a whole new liberating relationship and quality is released. Here is some information on dealing with it. And here is a way of integrating the collapse with your sex life. Guy McPherson is also good and if you are resolutely middle-class you might benefit from Dark Mountain although they’re a bit Chipping Norton.

[Hygellig]

And today more news that Arctic ice melt could trigger uncontrollable climate change - Arctic temperatures are a massive 20C above what is expected at this time of year. An Arctic sea ice has declined more than 30% in the past 25 years.

[pennycarbonara]

Mistigri, when I saw the first few words of that post in Threads I'm On I thought it was going to be about Trump planning to defund NASA climate research. Doh!
He appears to be backpedalling on a number of controversial policies although unfortunately not this one.
Anyway, my response to that defunding is to hope that Bill Gates, Tom Steyer and others step in to fund some replacement work via universities.

[Mistigri]

So reassuring to see cutting-edge climate science is being done by Mumsnetters! Could you link me to some of your published papers rorty?

[pennycarbonara]

Quite, yes. I'm not saying I'm perfect (although still much less consumerist than when I was younger). It's perfectly acceptable here to suggest that people are irresponsible for spending in ways they can't financially afford or for feeding their children unhealthy food regularly, or being avoidably noisy neigbours, but far less so to suggest that they shouldn't buy stuff, or not have further kids or pets, for environmental reasons. (Even a thread about excess spending on tat had to start with an apology for not being an "eco warrior" etc.)

[BiscuitMillionaire]

The reason it's hard to take action is because any sane person knows that reducing their own fossil fuel use would have absolutely minuscule effects in global terms. If action in the UK by UK citizens could protect the UK from future flooding etc then I think we would do it. But with a tiny population compared to China India Russia USA etc what we do is pretty irrelevant - if commendably altruistic.

[specialsubject]

Yes, most in the privileged UK are very wasteful. Witness the bleats on here if it suggested that hanging washing outside whenever possible, not buying endless power guzzling gadgets or buying less shit for tatmas is a good idea.

I won't be here in 50 years or less. But your ickle preshuses will be....

[cauliflowercheese14]

I cannot believe how little appetite there is to DO SOMETHING about this. I try all the 'how you can help' stuff and then see people consuming and wasting so much and want to weep.

[pennycarbonara]

As for saying China isn't doing anything... there have been quite a few reports to the contrary. They just aren't making the front pages.

"Growth in emissions has stalled despite global economic growth exceeding 3% a year, and is mainly down to China burning less coal,"
www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/nov/14/fossil-fuel-co2-emissions-nearly-stable-for-third-year-in-row

Stabilising isn't as good as decreasing, but it's something. China is economically pragmatic and knows its own stability is at risk from climate change. It's why it's buying up all that agricultural land on other continents, and why it's working hard on cutting emissions and pollution.
Might even go some way to make up for Trump.

[pennycarbonara]

Which points do you disagree with, and why?

Lack of detail is sadly a common problem in climate change discussions on MN, and I mean on the side of those who consider it a pertinent issue as well. Too many very short posts or just links that many may not click on rather than actually addressing points directly.

The specific issue of climate change gets a fair bit of disagreement on the site - I do wonder if emphasis on other related matters like pollution, the finity of resources may be more fruitful material for starting threads. Not that I mean don't post about CC, but that there are proportionally more threads about it than on other related environmental issues which more people on the board may agree on.

[WordGetsAround]

Thanks, hack, I read it, understood the explanation, but don't agree with it.

Why? Do you always believe everything you read on mumsnet?

I don't.

[hackmum]

That question has already been answered earlier in the thread, Word. Didn't you read it? Or did you read it and not understand it?

[WordGetsAround]

'This planet has warmed up and cooled down by itself for hundreds of millions of years and will continue to do so, which geological evidence of previous tropical and ice age climates in this country clearly demonstrates. Why should it stop now?'

this

[Lancelottie]

I'm impressed that you've read the whole Stern report! I tend to stick with the IPCC Summary for Policymakers unless I need specific details on something or other.

[pennycarbonara]

There's evidence in that people used to respond positively to requests to use less water in times of drought: after privatisation, use went up with such requests.

Really interesting, have you got any links on that?
It could be linked with other changes in society and consumerism too of which privatisation was part, but that does say something anyway.

Water in Scotland is still publicly owned. Not that they probably get many water shortages there, but I wonder if it makes a difference. Though there does seem to be a more public-spirited culture there.

[BungoWomble]

Ime people haven't changed because a) it means inconvenience, giving up their luxuries and b) because they've been waiting for everyone else to do so first. Ignoring those of us who did, because we were weird hippies and not really the ones to match themselves against.

It's an important point because it shows how the excessive individualism in our society contributes to the problem as much as sheer greed. In the past when we had communally owned resources (energy, water, etc), people communally looked after them. As soon as they were privatised and commodified, suddenly they were open to exploitation from all because they were paying for it so were damned well going to make use of it. There's evidence in that people used to respond positively to requests to use less water in times of drought: after privatisation, use went up with such requests.

[RortyCrankle]

SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace
Well, warming of this level has the capacity to radically alter life on earth for absolutely everyone. Rent increases could be sorted if we stopped voting in cunts every five minutes, so it doesn't induce the same kind of existential terror as a dramatically warmed climate does.

I am assuming the cunts to whom you refer were war criminal Blair and subsequently Brown who sold off all our gold at rock bottom prices and when Labour lost the election, left a note at the Treasury effectively saying, sorry no money left?