Author Topic: Climate Emergency is already here. How much worse it gets is still up to us (?)  (Read 372500 times)

Offline Indomitable_Carp

  • Asterixophile
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,753
  • From the depths of Sevvy Park lake
You wouldn't know it based on the complete lack of coverage (I think it got a 2 minutes slot on the BBC today), but MP's just passed a motion to make the UK the worlds first country to declare a climate emergency

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/01/declare-formal-climate-emergency-before-its-too-late-corbyn-warns

Of course it doesn't mean anything unless it is followed by action (and hopefully a few other countries following suit) - but the government commission on climate change just released its findings recommending Britain pledge to cut its emissions to net-zero by 2050, and recommending major changes in the short, medium and long term.

Offline Sudden Death Draft Loser

  • old and annoying
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,483


Of course it doesn't mean anything unless it is followed by action (and hopefully a few other countries following suit) - but the government commission on climate change just released its findings recommending Britain pledge to cut its emissions to net-zero by 2050, and recommending major changes in the short, medium and long term.

The scale of changes required to do this is absolutely huge. Requiring not only huge infrastructure but more importantly huge shifts in behavior and attitude. I don't think the human race is capable of the later to the extent required. The technological solutions have be around for years, but as a whole we are too greedy and selfish to really do anything significant.
"The greatest argument against democracy is to have a five minute conversation  with the average voter. "

Offline Indomitable_Carp

  • Asterixophile
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,753
  • From the depths of Sevvy Park lake
The scale of changes required to do this is absolutely huge. Requiring not only huge infrastructure but more importantly huge shifts in behavior and attitude. I don't think the human race is capable of the later to the extent required. The technological solutions have be around for years, but as a whole we are too greedy and selfish to really do anything significant.

That's why it requires laws and regulation. Basically social engineering. The easiest way to get people on board with that is to portray it as a crisis (which it is) in need of being on a war footing. People are happy to make sacrifices if its deemed to be something worthwhile. It is first and foremost a question of political will. The fact that the climate emergency motion passed without opposition shows that politicians can no longer justify hiding from the issue, which is a huge step in itself.

The recommendations put forward really don't sound too crazy:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48122911

Some recommendations include:

-Banning sale of conventional cars by 2030 (10 years ahead of current schedule)
-Planting 1.5 billion trees by 2050 (as an offsetting measure)
-Banning gas boilers in new homes by 2025
-20% drop in meat consumption by 2050
-Stopping the ban on onshore wind
-1-2% of GDP per year in investment

Of course this recommendation only predicts a 50-50 chance of stopping a 1.5c rise if other countries follow suit. In reality we probably need harsher measures. But its a good start.
« Last Edit: May 2, 2019, 06:42:42 pm by Indomitable_Carp »

Offline 24/7

  • Campaigns
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 38,277
  • Super Title: Guru Jim
2050 is a generation too late. Climate change needs to stop being a political points scorer. If they're serious about a cross-party group that addresses the issues NOW then fine - but they need to adjust that timeline. NOW.

As for behavioural change, well legislation is a critical factor here and studies on the psychology and mindset of societies indicate that all you need is 5% of population heading in the same direction to generate a self-propelling collective change chain reaction. 5%. It's not much. And it needs to happen NOW.


Everywhere.

Offline GreatEx

  • pectations. might be a cunt but isn't a capitalist cunt. Blissfully ignorant.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,349
I find it fascinating to watch from afar as a conservative UK government appears to be taking significant legislative action on climate change. In Australia, many senior figures in the Conservative government think CC is a myth - they dumped the last PM because he was serious about it and therefore a lefty mole - and although they occasionally pay lip service to CC in recognition of community concerns (5th biggest issue according to surveys, wow! Rolleyes) their policy is to do nothing and insist that we're too small to matter, only producing 2%  of the world's emissions (from 0.4% of its population).

Federal elections in two weeks... Conservatives were headed for certain defeat but they're playing the "opposition policy of no longer rigging the economy in favour of the uber rich will destroy us all" card and now it's 50:50.

What I'm saying is, you're right to fear that the rest of the world will do fuck all and doom us.

Online Red-Soldier

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,708
I think people seriously need to read this article and understand that nature really is the most important thing on the planet for us all:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/06/human-society-under-urgent-threat-loss-earth-natural-life-un-report


Human society under urgent threat from loss of Earth's natural life

Scientists reveal stark decline in biodiversity in damning UN report on planetary health


Human society is in jeopardy from the accelerating decline of the Earth’s natural life support systems, the world’s leading scientists have warned as they announced the results of the most thorough planetary health check ever undertaken.

From coral reefs flickering out beneath the oceans to rainforests desiccating into savannahs, nature is being destroyed at a rate that is tens to hundreds of times higher than the average over the last 10m years, according to the Global Assessment Report by the United Nations.

The biomass of wild mammals has fallen by 82%, natural ecosystems have lost about half their area and a million species are at risk of extinction – all largely as a result of human actions, said the study, compiled over three years by a team of more than 450 scientists and diplomats.

Two amphibian species in five are at risk of extinction, as are one third of reef-forming corals, while other marine animals by down by close to a third. The picture for insects – which are crucial to plant pollination – is less clear, but conservative estimates suggest at least 10% are threatened with extinction and in some regions, populations have crashed. In economic terms, the losses are jaw-dropping. Pollinator loss has put up to $577bn (£440bn) of crop output at risk, while land degradation has reduced the productivity of 23% of global land.

The knock-on impacts on humankind, including freshwater shortages and climate instability, are already “ominous” and will worsen without drastic remedial action, the authors said.

“The health of the ecosystems on which we and other species depend is deteriorating more rapidly than ever. We are eroding the very foundations of economies, livelihoods, food security, health and quality of life worldwide,” said Robert Watson, the chair of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (Ibpes). “We have lost time. We must act now.”
« Last Edit: May 6, 2019, 12:16:20 pm by Red-Soldier »

Offline Red Beret

  • Yellow Beret. Wants to sit in the Lobster Pot. Fat-fingered. Key. Boa. Rd. Kille. R. tonunlick! Soggy Knickers King. Bed-Exiting / Grunting / Bending Down / Cum Face Champion 2023.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 51,575
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/MEf-pmwFfLs" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/MEf-pmwFfLs</a>
I don't always visit Lobster Pot.  But when I do. I sit.

Popcorn's Art

Offline Red Beret

  • Yellow Beret. Wants to sit in the Lobster Pot. Fat-fingered. Key. Boa. Rd. Kille. R. tonunlick! Soggy Knickers King. Bed-Exiting / Grunting / Bending Down / Cum Face Champion 2023.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 51,575
John Oliver talks about steps to tackle climate change, featuring Bill Nye.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/rXeQKa4CAb4&amp;t=280s" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/rXeQKa4CAb4&amp;t=280s</a>
I don't always visit Lobster Pot.  But when I do. I sit.

Popcorn's Art

Offline Giono

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,924
  • And stop calling me Shirley
John Oliver talks about steps to tackle climate change, featuring Bill Nye.

RB, your link did not work. This new official one does.

Absolutely brilliant by Oliver...a diehard red.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/JDcro7dPqpA&amp;feature=share" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/JDcro7dPqpA&amp;feature=share</a>
"I am a great believer in luck and the harder I work the more of it I have." Stephen Leacock

Offline Red Beret

  • Yellow Beret. Wants to sit in the Lobster Pot. Fat-fingered. Key. Boa. Rd. Kille. R. tonunlick! Soggy Knickers King. Bed-Exiting / Grunting / Bending Down / Cum Face Champion 2023.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 51,575
RB, your link did not work. This new official one does.

Absolutely brilliant by Oliver...a diehard red.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/JDcro7dPqpA&amp;feature=share" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/JDcro7dPqpA&amp;feature=share</a>

Ah, must have been taken down since this morning - apologies!

Yeah, between him, Nick Fury and Austin Powers the reds have things covered!
I don't always visit Lobster Pot.  But when I do. I sit.

Popcorn's Art

Offline Trada

  • Fully paid up member of the JC cult. Ex-Tory boy. Corbyn's Chief Hagiographer. Sometimes hasn't got a kloop.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 22,813
  • Trada
I guess ut would be like someone like Johnny Ball making this in the UK.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/YLpWw1Fo1Xw" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/YLpWw1Fo1Xw</a>
« Last Edit: May 13, 2019, 09:36:49 pm by Big Jezza’s Jizza »
Don't blame me I voted for Jeremy Corbyn!!

Miss you Tracy more and more every day xxx

“I carry them with me: what they would have thought and said and done. Make them a part of who I am. So even though they’re gone from the world they’re never gone from me.

Offline GreatEx

  • pectations. might be a cunt but isn't a capitalist cunt. Blissfully ignorant.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,349
I find it fascinating to watch from afar as a conservative UK government appears to be taking significant legislative action on climate change. In Australia, many senior figures in the Conservative government think CC is a myth - they dumped the last PM because he was serious about it and therefore a lefty mole - and although they occasionally pay lip service to CC in recognition of community concerns (5th biggest issue according to surveys, wow! Rolleyes) their policy is to do nothing and insist that we're too small to matter, only producing 2%  of the world's emissions (from 0.4% of its population).

Federal elections in two weeks... Conservatives were headed for certain defeat but they're playing the "opposition policy of no longer rigging the economy in favour of the uber rich will destroy us all" card and now it's 50:50.

What I'm saying is, you're right to fear that the rest of the world will do fuck all and doom us.

Aaaaaand surprise surprise, Australia re-elected its conservative government with an increased majority. Sorry folks, you're on your own. Imma gonna take mah tax cut an buy me a hummer!

Offline Indomitable_Carp

  • Asterixophile
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,753
  • From the depths of Sevvy Park lake
Aaaaaand surprise surprise, Australia re-elected its conservative government with an increased majority. Sorry folks, you're on your own. Imma gonna take mah tax cut an buy me a hummer!


Yeah I just don't get it. Australia is already one of the places worst hit by climate change, and it is only going to get worse.

Online Red-Soldier

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,708
Aaaaaand surprise surprise, Australia re-elected its conservative government with an increased majority. Sorry folks, you're on your own. Imma gonna take mah tax cut an buy me a hummer!

You Aussies will love it when the real good stuff kicks in!

The droughts are already bad, but will only get worse.

Offline GreatEx

  • pectations. might be a cunt but isn't a capitalist cunt. Blissfully ignorant.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,349
You Aussies will love it when the real good stuff kicks in!

The droughts are already bad, but will only get worse.

Don't forget the floods! Yeah but there have always been droughts and floods, can't prove that any single event is due to CC. Anyway, we're so little and insignificant... This is China and India's problem to solve... And disasters in rural Australia are a great opportunity to show how True Blue I am by demanding billions in bailouts for our farmers - they're the beating heart of our nation dontchyaknow - while raging at the billions spent helping the sick and disabled have some kind of life, or the millions pledged to mitigate the disasters before they happen.

There's a lot of sand in this country, and many ways to bury one's head in it.

Offline 24/7

  • Campaigns
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 38,277
  • Super Title: Guru Jim
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48337629

WAKE UP!

Rise in global sea levels could have 'profound consequences'
By Matt McGrath
Environment correspondent

Scientists believe that global sea levels could rise far more than predicted, due to accelerating melting in Greenland and Antarctica,

The long-held view has been that the world's seas would rise by a maximum of just under a metre by 2100.

This new study, based on expert opinions, projects that the real level may be around double that figure.

This could lead to the displacement of hundreds of millions of people, the authors say.

The question of sea-level rise was one of the most controversial issues raised by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), when it published its fifth assessment report in 2013.

It said the continued warming of the planet, without major reductions in emissions, would see global waters rising by between 52cm and 98cm by 2100.

Many experts believe this was a very conservative estimate.

Ice scientists are also concerned that the models currently used to predict the influence of huge ice sheets on sea levels don't capture all of the uncertainties about how these are now melting.

Judgement day
To try to get a clearer picture, some of the leading researchers in the field carried out what is termed a structured expert judgement study, where the scientists make predictions based on their knowledge and understanding of what is happening in Greenland, West and East Antarctica.

In the researchers' view, if emissions continue on the current trajectory then the world's seas would be very likely to rise by between 62-238cm by 2100. This would be in a world that had warmed by around 5C - one of the worst case scenarios for global warming.

"For 2100, the ice sheet contribution is very likely in the range range of 7-178cm but once you add in glaciers and ice caps outside the ice sheets and thermal expansion of the seas, you tip well over two metres," said lead author Prof Jonathan Bamber from the University of Bristol.

The IPCC report in 2013 only considered what is "likely" to happen, which in scientific terms means they looked at 17-83% of the range of possibilities.

This new study looks at a broader range of results, covering 5-95% of the estimates.

For expected temperature rises up to 2C, Greenland's ice sheet remains the single biggest contributor to sea-level rise. However, as temperatures go beyond this, the much larger Antarctic ice sheets start to come into play.

"When you start to look at these lower likelihood but still plausible values, then the experts believe that there is a small but statistically significant probability that West Antarctica will transition to a very unstable state and parts of East Antarctica will start contributing as well," said Prof Bamber.

"But it's only at these higher probabilities for 5C that we see those type of behaviours kicking in."

According to the authors, this scenario would have huge implications for the planet.

They calculate that the world would lose an area of land equal to 1.79 million square kilometres - equivalent to the size of Libya.

Much of the land losses would be in important food growing areas such as the delta of the Nile. Large swathes of Bangladesh would be very difficult for people to continue to live in. Major global cities, including London, New York and Shanghai would be under threat.

"To put this into perspective, the Syrian refugee crisis resulted in about a million refugees coming into Europe," said Prof Bamber.

"That is about 200 times smaller than the number of people who would be displaced in a 2m sea-level rise."

The authors emphasise that there is still time to avoid these type of scenarios, if major cuts in emissions take place over the coming decades. They acknowledge that the chances of hitting the high end of this range are small, around 5%, but they should not be discounted, according to the lead author.

"If I said to you that there was a one in 20 chance that if you crossed the road you would be squashed you wouldn't go near it," said Prof Bamber.

"Even a 1% probability means that a one in a hundred year flood is something that could happen in your lifetime. I think that a 5% probability, crikey - I think that's a serious risk."

The study has been published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Offline ShakaHislop

  • Shocktrooper of the Vinny Cable Nasties
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,790
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
That's why it requires laws and regulation. Basically social engineering. The easiest way to get people on board with that is to portray it as a crisis (which it is) in need of being on a war footing. People are happy to make sacrifices if its deemed to be something worthwhile. It is first and foremost a question of political will. The fact that the climate emergency motion passed without opposition shows that politicians can no longer justify hiding from the issue, which is a huge step in itself.

The recommendations put forward really don't sound too crazy:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48122911

Some recommendations include:

-Banning sale of conventional cars by 2030 (10 years ahead of current schedule)
-Planting 1.5 billion trees by 2050 (as an offsetting measure)
-Banning gas boilers in new homes by 2025
-20% drop in meat consumption by 2050
-Stopping the ban on onshore wind
-1-2% of GDP per year in investment

Of course this recommendation only predicts a 50-50 chance of stopping a 1.5c rise if other countries follow suit. In reality we probably need harsher measures. But its a good start.

The UK government has agreed to follow at least the main recommendation.

Climate change: UK government to commit to 2050 target

Quote
Greenhouse gas emissions in the UK will be cut to almost zero by 2050, under the terms of a new government plan to tackle climate change.

Prime Minister Theresa May said reducing pollution would also benefit public health and cut NHS costs.

Britain is the first major nation to propose this target - and it has been widely praised by green groups.

But some say the phase-out is too late to protect the climate, and others fear that the task is impossible.

The UK already has a 2050 target - to reduce emissions by 80%. That was agreed by MPs under the Climate Change Act in 2008, but will now be amended to the new, much tougher, goal.

The actual terminology used by the government is "net zero" greenhouse gases by 2050.

That means emissions from homes, transport, farming and industry will have to be avoided completely or - in the most difficult examples - offset by planting trees or sucking CO2 out of the atmosphere.

Quote
Scotland has already committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2045, five years ahead of the UK government's target.

The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) recommended Wales should aim to cut emissions by a lower target of 95% by 2050 due to the importance of the farming industry to rural communities. But the Welsh government has since said it wants to go further - and will commit to net-zero by 2050, like the rest of the UK.

Northern Ireland is the only devolved administration which does not have its own climate change legislation and emissions targets.

Quote
The government will lay a "statutory instrument" in the Commons on Wednesday - a tactic that allows it to be fast-tracked through both houses of Parliament if other parties agree - which on this issue they generally do.

Like any government decision it could be overturned by future governments.

But the majority of Tory leadership candidates are backing it - and revoking the Act would need a majority Commons vote at a time when the public appear very concerned about the climate.

Mrs May has taken the unusual step of announcing that a group of young people will advise the government on priorities for environmental action. They will start their review in July.

This is seen as a nod towards young voters, many of whom have recently taken to the streets protesting that their environment was being destroyed.

Quote
The magnitude of the task is clear. The UK is already slipping away from its mid-term carbon targets of cutting emissions by 80% by 2050.

"Achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions is necessary, feasible and cost-effective," said professor Phil Taylor, head of engineering at Newcastle University.

"But UK policy is still way off the mark and the foundations are not in place to be able to meet this target.

"Even with all the evidence before us we are still opening new coal mines, extending Heathrow airport and pushing forward with fracking.

"We have unambitious building regulations, and our drive to phase out petrol and diesel cars by 2040 is too late."

Dr Shaun Fitzgerald, director of the Royal Institution, warned that the public might not support carbon-cutting measures such as turning down thermostats in the home.

And he questioned the ability of the government to insulate enough houses in time. "The prize for improving the efficiency of buildings is significant," he said.

"However, there is a practical challenge in terms of the number of sufficient skilled workers to undertake the work, and then of course the barrier of getting homeowners to get the work done."

There will be major difficulties, too, in supplying low-carbon heating to homes and industries as natural gas is phased out.

Doug Parr, Greenpeace UK's chief scientist, said it was a "big moment" for the climate but there were questions around plans to allow for international carbon credits which allow the UK to pay to offset its emissions elsewhere in the world.

Such off-setting had a history of failure, was not cost-efficient and shifting the burden to developing nations undermined the commitment, he told the Guardian.

Chris Skidmore, the acting energy minister, said the government did not "intend" to use international carbon credits but had kept it "as an option". "We need to be able to decarbonise in the best possible way so we don't want to rule it out," he said.

Mrs May's announcement indicates that she has taken notice of potential industrial pitfalls.

To assuage Treasury fears about competitiveness, she has stipulated that the net zero policy should be reviewed in five years to see whether other nations were taking similar actions.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48596775

I don't like the sound of that young people review. Sounds like a pointless gimmick.

Offline Sudden Death Draft Loser

  • old and annoying
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,483
Too little too late
"The greatest argument against democracy is to have a five minute conversation  with the average voter. "

Offline Red Raw

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,822
  • Klopptimistic
Unfortunately the net zero bill includes a get out clause in case they get cold feet.
Quote
Moreover, there is a very clear “get-out” clause after five years, giving the UK the option of abandoning the target if other countries are not taking similarly ambitious action. The justification for this is that UK industries would face unfair competition if others continued with their carbon emissions.

This is wrong on two counts. It undermines business certainty, which will affect long-term investment decisions. And it fails to give the spur to the UK’s low-carbon sector. The CBI has already said some sectors will need clear pathways to enable investment in low-carbon technologies. This law doesn’t provide them.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/12/theresa-may-net-zero-emissions-target-climate-change
Fucking incredible how readily some of these arseholes accept the uncertainty of Brexit but can't bring themselves to commit to something as certain and important as our warming climate, particularly when there are so many potential upsides (better air quality, warmer homes etc.)  Who knows, we could even spawn some world leading research and industrial leadership in low carbon technologies.  It used to be called investment.

Offline Indomitable_Carp

  • Asterixophile
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,753
  • From the depths of Sevvy Park lake
Unfortunately the net zero bill includes a get out clause in case they get cold feet.Fucking incredible how readily some of these arseholes accept the uncertainty of Brexit but can't bring themselves to commit to something as certain and important as our warming climate, particularly when there are so many potential upsides (better air quality, warmer homes etc.)  Who knows, we could even spawn some world leading research and industrial leadership in low carbon technologies.  It used to be called investment.


Massive shame. That really would've been a positive-legacy for Theresa May even if she fucked everything else. But you just know if the Tories win the next election (god forbid) that bill will not see out past the next five years.

Still, it is a start.

Offline Sudden Death Draft Loser

  • old and annoying
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,483
"The greatest argument against democracy is to have a five minute conversation  with the average voter. "


Offline ChaChaMooMoo

  • From doubters to believers - Klopp 2015
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,905
  • Justice shall prevail.
Not sure if this is the right thread for this. But as it is linked with Climate Change, I thought it might fit in here.

Quote
'Football pitch' of Amazon forest lost every minute

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48827490

An area of Amazon rainforest roughly the size of a football pitch is now being cleared every single minute, according to satellite data.

The rate of losses has accelerated as Brazil's new right-wing president favours development over conservation.

The largest rainforest in the world, the Amazon is a vital carbon store that slows down the pace of global warming.

A senior Brazilian official, speaking anonymously, told us his government was encouraging deforestation.

How is the forest is cleared?

Usually by bulldozers, either pushing against the trunks to force the shallow roots out of the ground, or by a pair of the machines advancing with a chain between them.

In one vast stretch of recently cleared land, we found giant trees lying on their sides, much of the foliage still green and patches of bare earth drying under a fierce sun.

Later, the timber will be cleared and sold or burned, and the land prepared for farming.

In other areas, illegal loggers carve new tracks through the undergrowth to reach particularly valuable hardwood trees which they sell on the black market, often to order.

What does this mean for the forest?

Satellite images show a sharp increase in clearances of trees over the first half of this year, since Jair Bolsonaro became president of Brazil, the country that owns most of the Amazon region.

The most recent analysis suggests a staggering scale of losses over the past two months in particular, with about a hectare being cleared every minute on average.

The single biggest reason to fell trees, according to official figures, is to create new pastures for cattle, and during our visit we saw countless herds grazing on land that used to be rainforest.

Over the past decade, previous governments had managed to reduce the clearances with concerted action by federal agencies and a system of fines.

But this approach is being overturned by Mr Bolsonaro and his ministers who have criticised the penalties and overseen a dramatic fall in confiscations of timber and convictions for environmental crimes.

Why does this matter?

The forest holds a vast amount of carbon in its billions of trees, accumulated over hundreds or even thousands of years.

Every year, the leaves also absorb a huge quantity of carbon dioxide that would otherwise be left in the atmosphere adding to the rise in global temperatures.

By one recent estimate, the trees of the Amazon rainforest pulled in carbon dioxide equivalent to the fossil fuel emissions of most of the nine countries that own or border the forest between 1980-2010.

The forest is also the richest home to biodiversity on the planet, a habitat for perhaps one-tenth of all species of plants and animals.

And it is where one million indigenous people live, hunting and gathering amid the trees.

What does Brazil's new policy mean?

According to a senior Brazilian environment official, the impact is so "huge" that he took the risk of giving us an unauthorised interview to bring it to the attention of the world.

We had to meet in secret and disguise his face and voice because Mr Bolsonaro has banned his environment staff from talking to the media.

Over the course of three hours, a startling inside picture emerged of small, under-resourced teams of government experts passionate about saving the forest but seriously undermined by their own political masters.

Mr Bolsonaro swept to power on a populist agenda backed by agricultural businesses and small farmers, many of whom believe that too much of the Amazon region is protected and that environment staff have too much influence.

He has said he wants to weaken the laws protecting the forest and has attacked the civil servants whose job it is to guard the trees.

The result, according to the environment official, is that "it feels like we are the enemies of the Amazon, when in fact we should be seen in a completely different way, as the people trying to protect our ecological heritage for future generations".

"They don't want us to speak because we'll say the truth, that conservation areas are being invaded and destroyed, there are many people marking out areas that should be protected."

So what could happen next?

The official believes the figures for deforestation could be even worse than officially recognised.

"There's a government attempt to show the data is wrong, to show the numbers don't portray the reality," he told me.

Ministers are considering hiring an independent contractor to handle information from satellite images of the region, questioning the work of the current government agency.

Also, the rainy season is only now coming to an end, and because deforestation typically takes place in the drier months of the year, the official fears that the pace of losses could pick up speed.

"In truth, it can be even worse," he said, because many of the areas recently damaged haven't yet been picked up by satellite images.

"People need to know what's happening because we need allies to fight against invasions, to protect areas, and against deforestation."

What does the government say?

We made repeated requests for interviews with the ministers for environment and agriculture but were refused.

Earlier this year, Mr Bolsonaro, who's known as the "Trump of the Tropics", invited the US president to be a partner in exploiting the resources of the Amazon.

Last month, in an interview with BBC Brasil, the environment minister Ricardo Salles, said landowners should be rewarded for preserving forest and that developed nations should foot the bill.

And there's an assertive response when voices in the outside world call for the forest to be saved.

The president's top security adviser, General Augusto Heleno Pereira, told Bloomberg last month that it was "nonsense" that the Amazon was part of the world's heritage.

"The Amazon is Brazilian, the heritage of Brazil and should be dealt with by Brazil for the benefit of Brazil," he said.

What's the view of the farmers?

For decades, farming organisations have argued that the network of protected areas of forest, including reserves for indigenous people, is too restrictive for a developing country that needs to create jobs.

A leading figure in the farmers' union in the city of Santarem, a hub for soya and cattle, told me that other countries had cleared their trees for agriculture but now wanted Brazil not to do the same.

Vanderley Wegner said that the US and Europe, which buy produce from the Amazon region, have far less stringent controls on their forests, and that Europe "has very little forest left" anyway.

"We have to develop the Amazon. More than four million people live here and they need development too, it's a constitutional right of every Brazilian citizen," he said.

Offline ShakaHislop

  • Shocktrooper of the Vinny Cable Nasties
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,790
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
National Trust plans to dump fossil fuel shares

The National Trust has announced that it will sell off the shares it holds in fossil fuel companies.

At present, 4% of its £1bn stock market investment is in such firms.

The Trust, the biggest conservation charity in Europe, said it wanted to invest in green start-ups and portfolios that benefited nature and the environment.

It said it had set a three-year timescale for the change, but most shares would be sold within a year.

Until now, the Trust had been prepared to invest in firms that derived less than 10% of their turnover from the extraction of thermal coal or the production of oil from tar sands.

That same threshold was also adopted by the Church of England in 2015. A year ago, however, the Church's General Synod voted to withdraw investment from companies that do not meet the terms of the Paris climate agreement by 2023.

And last month, the Norwegian parliament approved plans for the country's sovereign wealth fund, which manages $1tn (£786bn) of the country's assets, to sell coal and oil investments worth $13bn and invest in renewable energy projects instead.

"Over the years, we've gradually evolved our investment strategy to reduce our carbon footprint," said the Trust's chief financial officer, Peter Vermeulen.

Speaking to the BBC's Today programme, he added: "As a conservation charity [we] believe that after decades' worth of lobbying not enough has been done by the oil and gas companies, and for that reason we're looking to withdraw our investment and invest in companies that are looking to deliver environmental benefits as well as financial returns."

He acknowledged that oil giants such as BP and Shell were investing in renewable energy, but said that while their investments were "not insignificant", they were "too small as a proportion of their total capital investment".

"Still less than 10% of the oil major's investment is on low-carbon technologies and we believe that's not sufficient," he said.

The Trust said it analysed the carbon footprint of its investment portfolio every six months.

It said it also required all its investment managers to be signatories of the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment.

The National Trust is responsible for the upkeep of 248,000 hectares of land, 780 miles of coastline and more than 500 historic buildings and parks across England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

It has 5.2 million members and more than 60,000 volunteers.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48853217

Offline Mutton Geoff

  • 'The Invigilator'
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,663
  • Life is a journey, not a destination.
I blame Corbyn 8)
A world were Liars and Hypocrites are accepted and rewarded and honest people are derided!
Who voted in this lying corrupt bastard anyway

Offline BobOnATank

  • Kopite
  • *****
  • Posts: 920
From a  few days ago, Mexico with 31c daytime temp:

Freak summer hailstorm buries cars in Mexico's Guadalajara
At least six neighbourhoods woke to find their streets covered in ice pellets up to two metres deep

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/01/freak-summer-hailstorm-buries-cars-in-mexicos-guadalajara

Offline HarryLabrador

  • went broke, so had to get the retrievers in.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,263
Southern California shaken by 6.4 magnitude earthquake

Southern California has been struck by a strong earthquake of 6.4 magnitude, causing fires and damaging buildings.

The tremor's epicentre was near the city of Ridgecrest, about 150 miles (240 km) northeast of Los Angeles.

Firefighters said they were providing medical assistance and dealing with fires in and around the city.

People from the Mojave Desert to the Pacific coast are reported to have felt the quake, which is the strongest to hit the region in two decades.

The Ridgecrest Regional Hospital has been evacuated, the Kern County Fire Department tweeted.

The city's mayor, Peggy Breeden, told CNN that a state of emergency has also been declared in the city.

Ms Breeden said that some people had been struck by objects falling from buildings and gas lines had been broken.

"We are used to earthquakes but we're not used to this significance," she said.

Stephen Sykes, who lives in Ridgecrest, was in the shower when his house started to shake.

"The whole house shook violently and we both ran out into the street. This went on for about ten to fifteen seconds, we were really scared," he told the BBC.

"Currently we are getting ready in case there's another one. We are moving items onto the floor and have turned off the gas supply. We will probably sleep outside tonight," he added.

The earthquake was reportedly felt as far as Las Vegas in Nevada. There have been several smaller aftershocks.

US President Donald Trump tweeted that the situation was under control.

Lucy Jones, a seismologist with the US Geological Survey, told reporters the epicentre was in a relatively uninhabited area.

She said there would likely be a number of aftershocks, some powerful.

One man tweeted images from inside a supermarket in Ridgecrest, which has a population of about 28,000 people, showing the aisle floors covered with fallen items.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48876482
SoS Membership Number: 387

Offline Banquo's Ghost

  • Macbeth's on repeat. To boldly split infinitives that lesser men would dare. To.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,481
What has an earthquake got to do with climate change?  ???
Be humble, for you are made of earth. Be noble, for you are made of stars.

Offline Jiminy Cricket

  • Batshit fucker and Chief Yuletide Porcine Voyeur
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 10,051
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
What has an earthquake got to do with climate change?  ???
It would seem a stretch, wouldn't it. But, apparently, Jeremy Clarkson poo-poos the notion: suddenly the unlikely theory deserves investigation! :)

https://www.scientia.global/dr-christian-brandes-can-climate-change-cause-earthquakes/

Though, I am unsure of how the the theory would imply more earthquakes in California.
would rather have a wank wearing a barb wire glove
If you're chasing thrills, try a bit of auto-asphyxiation with a poppers-soaked orange in your gob.

Offline 24/7

  • Campaigns
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 38,277
  • Super Title: Guru Jim
What has an earthquake got to do with climate change?  ???
It's okay, just like the climate and everything else from world peace to global trade to the women's world cup, Trump has it all under control...

Offline BarryCrocker

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,143
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Nothing to see here folks.

Anchorage, Alaska, Shatters All-Time Heat Record, And It Could Get Hotter Still
Temperatures spiked to 90 degrees for the first time in the city's history.
By Nick Visser

Thermometers in Anchorage hit 90 degrees Fahrenheit (about 32 degrees Celsius) for the first time on record this Thursday.

The National Weather Service said temperatures around the city were unusually high on the Fourth of July thanks to a massive heat dome that’s settled over Alaska, which has seen more than 30 days in a row of above average temperatures. Readings on Thursday shattered a 50-year-old temperature record set June 14, 1969, when the mercury hit 85 degrees.

The heat wave is expected to continue through July 8, and weather officials said thermometers could top out around 90 degrees again and again.

The National Weather Service initially announced the record had been broken earlier in the day at the Anchorage International Airport, but temperatures climbed a degree higher around 5 p.m.

The wild weather has forced Anchorage to change several plans this year, including canceling the city’s Fourth of July fireworks display due to concerns about wildfires, The New York Times reported.

“This is unprecedented,” Anchorage Mayor Ethan Berkowitz told the outlet this week. “I tease people that Anchorage is the coolest city in the country — and climatically that is true — but right now we are seeing record heat.”

Alaska has borne the brunt of climate change as the planet warms, and is currently America’s fastest-warming state with temperatures rising two or three times faster than the lower 48, according to the National Climate Assessment.

Sea ice around the state is at dramatically low levels and ocean temperatures around the region are far above normal.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/anchorage-hottest-day_n_5d1eefa4e4b04c4814117eb1
And all the world is football shaped, It's just for me to kick in space. And I can see, hear, smell, touch, taste.

Offline Nobby Reserve

  • Onanistic Charades Champion Of Roundabouts. Euphemistic Gerbil Starver.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 11,984
  • Do you wanna build a snowman?
Extinction Rebellion have launched their latest protest, using five boats to stop traffic in Cardiff, Glasgow, Bristol, Leeds, and London.

 

I work in Manchester and I'm presuming they looked at doing the same here, but realised quickly that Manchester City Council had already beat them to the punch of grinding traffic to a halt in the city.
A Tory, a worker and an immigrant are sat round a table. There's a plate of 10 biscuits in the middle. The Tory takes 9 then turns to the worker and says "that immigrant is trying to steal your biscuit"

Offline Jake

  • Fuck VAR
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 13,155
  • Fuck VAR
Proud of my borthers and sisters in Leeds today. Shameful how little coverage it's getting.
I'm not vaccinated against covid and ... I don't wear masks.

Offline Nobby Reserve

  • Onanistic Charades Champion Of Roundabouts. Euphemistic Gerbil Starver.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 11,984
  • Do you wanna build a snowman?
Proud of my borthers and sisters in Leeds today. Shameful how little coverage it's getting.

Have you considered that that might be deliberate...?
A Tory, a worker and an immigrant are sat round a table. There's a plate of 10 biscuits in the middle. The Tory takes 9 then turns to the worker and says "that immigrant is trying to steal your biscuit"

Offline Jake

  • Fuck VAR
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 13,155
  • Fuck VAR
Have you considered that that might be deliberate...?

Yes. It doesn't sell. Unless you're suggesting more nefarious reasons?
I'm not vaccinated against covid and ... I don't wear masks.

Online Red-Soldier

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,708
Proud of my borthers and sisters in Leeds today. Shameful how little coverage it's getting.

It's the biggest issue facing the world, yet it is mostly covered as a back story.

Online Red-Soldier

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,708
True cost of cheap food is health and climate crises, says commission

Radical change needed to make UK food and farming system sustainable within 10 years


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/16/true-cost-of-cheap-food-is-health-and-climate-crises-says-commission

The true cost of cheap, unhealthy food is a spiralling public health crisis and environmental destruction, according to a high-level commission. It said the UK’s food and farming system must be radically transformed and become sustainable within 10 years.

The commission’s report, which was welcomed by the environment secretary, Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Fuckwitted Pob lookalike Michael Gove, concluded that farmers must be enabled to shift from intensive farming to more organic and wildlife friendly production, raising livestock on grass and growing more nuts and pulses. It also said a National Nature Service should be created to give opportunities for young people to work in the countryside and, for example, tackle the climate crisis by planting trees or restoring peatlands.

The commission criticised decades of government policy aimed at making food cheaper, fuelling rising obesity and other health problems. “The true cost of that is simply passed off elsewhere in society – in a degraded environment, spiralling ill health and impoverished high streets,” said the report.

Pritchard said the UK had the third cheapest basket of food in the developed world, but also had the highest food poverty in Europe in terms of people being able to afford a healthy diet. Type 2 diabetes, a diet-related illness, costs the UK £27bn a year, she said.

The commission also said agriculture produced more than 10% of the UK’s climate-heating gases and was the biggest destroyer of wildlife; the abundance of key species has fallen 67% since 1970 and 13% of species are now close to extinction.

Offline Sudden Death Draft Loser

  • old and annoying
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,483
'No doubt left' about scientific consensus on global warming, say experts

The scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming is likely to have passed 99%, according to the lead author of the most authoritative study on the subject, and could rise further after separate research that clears up some of the remaining doubts.

Three studies published in Nature and Nature Geoscience use extensive historical data to show there has never been a period in the last 2,000 years when temperature changes have been as fast and extensive as in recent decades.

It had previously been thought that similarly dramatic peaks and troughs might have occurred in the past, including in periods dubbed the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Climate Anomaly. But the three studies use reconstructions based on 700 proxy records of temperature change, such as trees, ice and sediment, from all continents that indicate none of these shifts took place in more than half the globe at any one time.


The Little Ice Age, for example, reached its extreme point in the 15th century in the Pacific Ocean, the 17th century in Europe and the 19th century elsewhere, says one of the studies. This localisation is markedly different from the trend since the late 20th century when records are being broken year after year over almost the entire globe, including this summer’s European heatwave.

Major temperature shifts in the distant past are also likely to have been primarily caused by volcanic eruptions, according to another of the studies, which helps to explain the strong global fluctuations in the first half of the 18th century as the world started to move from a volcanically cooled era to a climate warmed by human emissions. This has become particularly pronounced since the late 20th century, when temperature rises over two decades or longer have been the most rapid in the past two millennia, notes the third.

The authors say this highlights how unusual warming has become in recent years as a result of industrial emissions.

“There is no doubt left – as has been shown extensively in many other studies addressing many different aspects of the climate system using different methods and data sets,” said Stefan Brönnimann, from the University of Bern and the Pages 2K consortium of climate scientists.

Commenting on the study, other scientists said it was an important breakthrough in the “fingerprinting” task of proving how human responsibility has changed the climate in ways not seen in the past.

“This paper should finally stop climate change deniers claiming that the recent observed coherent global warming is part of a natural climate cycle. This paper shows the truly stark difference between regional and localised changes in climate of the past and the truly global effect of anthropogenic greenhouse emissions,” said Mark Maslin, professor of climatology at University College London.

Previous studies have shown near unanimity among climate scientists that human factors – car exhausts, factory chimneys, forest clearance and other sources of greenhouse gases – are responsible for the exceptional level of global warming.

A 2013 study in Environmental Research Letters found 97% of climate scientists agreed with this link in 12,000 academic papers that contained the words “global warming” or “global climate change” from 1991 to 2011. Last week, that paper hit 1m downloads, making it the most accessed paper ever among the 80+ journals published by the Institute of Physics, according to the authors.
Climate crisis blamed as temperature records broken in three nations
Read more

The pushback has been political rather than scientific. In the US, the rightwing thinktank the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CPI) is reportedly putting pressure on Nasa to remove a reference to the 97% study from its webpage. The CPI has received event funding from the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers and Charles Koch Institute, which have much to lose from a transition to a low-carbon economy.

But among academics who study the climate, the convergence of opinion is probably strengthening, according to John Cook, the lead author of the original consensus paper and a follow-up study on the “consensus about consensus” that looked at a range of similar estimates by other academics.

He said that at the end of his 20-year study period there was more agreement than at the beginning: “There was 99% scientific consensus in 2011 that humans are causing global warming.” With ever stronger research since then and increasing heatwaves and extreme weather, Cook believes this is likely to have risen further and is now working on an update.

“As expertise in climate science increases, so too does agreement with human-caused global warming,” Cook wrote on the Skeptical Science blog. “The good news is public understanding of the scientific consensus is increasing. The bad news is there is still a lot of work to do yet as climate deniers continue to persistently attack the scientific consensus.”

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jul/24/scientific-consensus-on-humans-causing-global-warming-passes-99?fbclid=IwAR1VbFhfMcHusiHlocOKtEPqwV3srojjthZOBfzMGfaRZaIkWiR-jRa9Ffc
"The greatest argument against democracy is to have a five minute conversation  with the average voter. "

Online Red-Soldier

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,708
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/26/war-on-science-trump-administration-muzzles-climate-experts-critics-say


War on science: Trump administration muzzles climate experts, critics say

Whistleblowers and groups tracking agency decisions say administration is ignoring science and censoring expertise



The Trump administration is disregarding science and expertise across a wide range of government work, as documented by whistleblowers and groups tracking agency decisions.

Trump officials are censoring warnings about the climate crisis, moving critical agencies out of Washington and enacting far-reaching changes in what facts regulators can consider when they choose between industry and the public good.

One former climate scientist for the National Park Service, Maria Caffrey, filed a whistleblower complaint this week and testified to Congress that she was blocked from publishing data about how coastal parks could flood as the seas rise.

“Politics has no place in science,” Caffrey said in an oped for the Guardian. “I am an example of the less discussed methods the administration is using to destroy scientific research. I wasn’t fired and immediately told to leave; instead they sought retribution by discretely using governmental bureaucracy to apply pressure and gradually cut funding.”

Caffrey’s allegations follow a trend. A state department intelligence aide resigned after the White House refused to let him submit written testimony to lawmakers about “possibly catastrophic” harm from the climate crisis.

Offline Sudden Death Draft Loser

  • old and annoying
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,483
It's speeding up, due to "feedback mechanisms"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49125391
"The greatest argument against democracy is to have a five minute conversation  with the average voter. "