Rogue Keeper on 4/10/2007 at 09:45

---

Without significant addition of CO2 from industrial sources, everything would have more time to adapt. Or, in other words, let's try not accelerate natural process of long-term climatic changes. It's not good for us, it's not good for other species, it's not good for anybody.

If that's not a good reason to somebody : it's not good for economical stability either.

demagogue on 4/10/2007 at 23:57

---

Nobody credible is saying "the planet is doomed".
It's always been a sociological/economic issue ... it's all about dealing with devastated economies and 100K's of environmental refugees.



That's a good chart.

Aside from showing the lock-step of temperature and CO2, it gives you a good idea of what it means that our current level is 377 ppm, already way off the chart, and in 50 years will be 500 ppm if the current rate of emission continues (which far from reversing has steadily been increasing, and shows every sign of continuing to increase).

catbarf on 5/10/2007 at 01:20

---

(http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,210444,00.html)

Before you litter, think of the polar bears.

Disclaimer: I hate Fox news with a passion due to their ridiculously conservative skew and so I do not sincerely intend for the above to be taken as fact. Just funny.

Rogue Keeper on 5/10/2007 at 09:41

---

(http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/05/climatechange)

jay pettitt on 6/10/2007 at 10:14

---

Which technology would that be? Agriculture?

I think you might have a slightly rosy view of what life in a Jurassic like period may be like. I've no special knowledge to base my pointless speculation below, but as far as we can tell from the fossil record there weren't any large mammals or grass; which isn't a promising start. Lots of things were very huge and presumably had similarly large stomachs that would happily ferment, over a period of weeks, horsetails and pine needles and other things that would grow. Sure, that was then and this is now; but it's not the sort of future I'd choose given the choice. Civilisation happened because the Holocene provided a uniquely stable and moderate climate to grow food in.

Yes, an extinction event and a wholly inhospitable Venus like climate would be an absolute extreme end of the scary scale, but also extreme is the idea that the water will go up a foot or two and some poor people in Africa might die, but otherwise we'll be alright. The current IPCC assessment (due to be replaced soon, thank goodness) was written a while back and with the assumption that it would take a thousand years or two for the major ice bodies to collapse. At their current rate of demise and with the current increase in CO2 levels the ice sheets could be gone in as little as 20, and without dramatic cuts (in the region of 90%) in CO2 emissions they'll certainly go during this century. That represents an end game point where natural processes are set in motion and we no longer have any notable influence over the climate.

Climate change is no longer an 'ooh, will it effect the economy?' kind of issue. We have a unique window of opportunity that isn't going to be open to us for very long ~ and it's not as though weaning ourselves off fossil fuels is going to be a small task. It's rather worrying that at this stage many people are reluctant to even talk about it.