Global warming/climate change discussion

When it just doesn't fit anywhere else.
Post Reply
PeterG
Posts: 894
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:52 pm
Location: Central PA
Affiliation: Conserv. Mennonite

Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by PeterG »

This is the best conversation on global warming/climate change that I've come across.

Discuss.

Rules for this thread:
Do not post until you have completely listened to the discussion linked to above and/or completely read the transcripted excerpts linked to above.
Do not question or denigrate the qualifications, character, or motives of any individual or group.
0 x
"It is a weird" —Ken
ken_sylvania
Posts: 3969
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 12:46 pm
Affiliation: CM

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by ken_sylvania »

John Christy captures my concern with our current policy responses to climate change when he says:
Okay, geoengineering now is a different kind of question. That's where you want to do something explicit to stop whatever climate changing and gear it toward something you think you can. I think it is frightening to me to think of geoengineering. Because if we cannot predict the system now, how can we know what we are going to do if we try to geoengineer something? Like put up a bunch of panels that reflect sunlight or aerosols[?] in the stratosphere that reflect sunlight. Those are scary options to me because we do not know what might ultimately happen as a result of something like that.
When responding to emergencies, some people do things that make the situation worse because they feel compelled to do something, anything, rather than do nothing. Until we know what the ramifications of our "fixes" will be, maybe it is best to not force them. That being said, some good old "clean up after yourself" and "don't waste natural resources" is in order.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23818
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by Josh »

This was a real good EconTalk (and I find myself saying that pretty rarely these days). Highly recommend taking the time to listen to it.
0 x
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8522
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by Robert »

I really enjoyed this also. Well done. Good link to post.

One is working from a fear of what will happen to the environment and the other is reacting from the fear of what will happen to humans if some of the hard line ideas for climate control is used.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8522
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by Robert »

Robert wrote:I really enjoyed this also. Well done. Good link to post.

One is working from a fear of what will happen to the environment and humans because of it if some of the extreme predictions come about and the other is reacting from the fear of what will happen to humans if some of the hard line ideas for climate control is used.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
PeterG
Posts: 894
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:52 pm
Location: Central PA
Affiliation: Conserv. Mennonite

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by PeterG »

I'm glad to see the participation here so far. Thanks!
0 x
"It is a weird" —Ken
PeterG
Posts: 894
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:52 pm
Location: Central PA
Affiliation: Conserv. Mennonite

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by PeterG »

ken_sylvania wrote:John Christy captures my concern with our current policy responses to climate change when he says:
Okay, geoengineering now is a different kind of question. That's where you want to do something explicit to stop whatever climate changing and gear it toward something you think you can. I think it is frightening to me to think of geoengineering. Because if we cannot predict the system now, how can we know what we are going to do if we try to geoengineer something? Like put up a bunch of panels that reflect sunlight or aerosols[?] in the stratosphere that reflect sunlight. Those are scary options to me because we do not know what might ultimately happen as a result of something like that.
When responding to emergencies, some people do things that make the situation worse because they feel compelled to do something, anything, rather than do nothing. Until we know what the ramifications of our "fixes" will be, maybe it is best to not force them. That being said, some good old "clean up after yourself" and "don't waste natural resources" is in order.
A great point, and one that Christy makes very effectively, especially when referring to the increase in poverty that would result from higher energy costs. I find this particularly compelling because the degree of certainty here seems much greater than in other parts of the debate.

But it works both ways; Emanuel is similarly concerned about the unknown, unintended consequences of unabated CO2 emissions.
Last edited by PeterG on Thu Mar 02, 2017 4:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
"It is a weird" —Ken
PeterG
Posts: 894
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:52 pm
Location: Central PA
Affiliation: Conserv. Mennonite

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by PeterG »

Robert wrote:One is working from a fear of what will happen to the environment and humans because of it if some of the extreme predictions come about and the other is reacting from the fear of what will happen to humans if some of the hard line ideas for climate control is used.
Good summary.
0 x
"It is a weird" —Ken
User avatar
Bootstrap
Posts: 14439
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:59 am
Affiliation: Mennonite

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by Bootstrap »

This is a good discussion among two scientists.

A little context: I am only aware of three climate scientists who have received government research grants in the field, published peer reviewed studies, and speak out against the mainstream views. I think John Christy has integrity, I tend to think of Richard Lindzen as a shill, and I don't know much about Roy Spencer except that he works at the same university as John Christy. So John Christy was a good choice for this interview. Kerry is more mainstream. If you wanted someone as contrarian as Christy on the "sky is falling" side of the debate, you wouldn't pick Kerry. If you picked one of those people, it would have been very difficult to find common ground, so these two are a good choice. (I generally agree with Kerry on most things.)

And I appreciated the tone of the discussion - Kerry and Christy listened to and responded to each other, treating each other well, in a discussion where they did not need to tear the other down.

I agree that we don't know how much the climate will change, that's why scientists predict anywhere between 2.5 and 9 degrees for a doubling of C02, and that makes it hard to be sure how urgent the situation is. If we hit problems, I don't think we can quickly recover.

I also agree that we don't want to panic, and that it's important to keep energy prices reasonable. But some choices are easy - fracked natural gas is cheaper than coal and also much cleaner if done right. Others are harder - nuclear is really promising, but we have to be confident in how we dispose of nuclear materials. Solar and wind and other renewables are coming down in price, really good battery technology is developing and may make it more practical, dams are being used to generate electricity in some places, adding these things to the mix is a good thing. They aren't making new dinosaurs these days, so the future cannot always rely on fossil fuels, and we need to be planning for replacements in the long run without making energy too expensive in the short run. So I think there are ways to minimize risk and research future options without making electricity prohibitively expensive.

Most of these things are really up to governments and not individuals, unless we generate our own electricity. There's only one power line to my house. I don't get to decide who is on the other end of that power line. There's only one gas line to my house. I manage to have my own well and septic tank, but these things are not up to me.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
PeterG
Posts: 894
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:52 pm
Location: Central PA
Affiliation: Conserv. Mennonite

Re: Global warming/climate change discussion

Post by PeterG »

Bootstrap wrote:I tend to think of Richard Lindzen as a shill
PeterG wrote:Do not question or denigrate the qualifications, character, or motives of any individual or group.
Just sayin'. :)

Nonetheless, I appreciate the overall substantiveness of your post.
0 x
"It is a weird" —Ken
Post Reply