Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _EAllusion »

The Trump admin released a report predicting a 7 F / 4 C degree warming by the turn of the next century assuming no course correction. That's well within the range of catastrophic change. It did so in a report attempting to justify freezing Obama fuel standards by arguing reduced carbon emissions from this action will just be a drop in a bucket. The "drop in the bucket" logic relies on assuming that the rest of the planet takes no action and catastrophic warming is therefore inevitable.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... 11163cfe55
_SteelHead
_Emeritus
Posts: 8261
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 1:40 am

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _SteelHead »

Hope y'all figure out how to eat crude oil, cuz the ecology is going to go down the toilet....... But hey #MAGA
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin
_canpakes
_Emeritus
Posts: 8541
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:54 am

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _canpakes »

EAllusion wrote: It did so in a report attempting to justify freezing Obama fuel standards by arguing reduced carbon emissions from this action will just be a drop in a bucket. The "drop in the bucket" logic relies on assuming that the rest of the planet takes no action and catastrophic warming is therefore inevitable.

It’s hard to imagine that the folks making these sorts of justifications as a means to avoid any common sense change can look at themselves in the mirror each day and not recognize how crappy a person they’re choosing to be.
_DarkHelmet
_Emeritus
Posts: 5422
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 11:38 pm

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _DarkHelmet »

EAllusion wrote:The Trump admin released a report predicting a 7 F / 4 C degree warming by the turn of the next century assuming no course correction. That's well within the range of catastrophic change. It did so in a report attempting to justify freezing Obama fuel standards by arguing reduced carbon emissions from this action will just be a drop in a bucket. The "drop in the bucket" logic relies on assuming that the rest of the planet takes no action and catastrophic warming is therefore inevitable.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... 11163cfe55


Trump will be dead long before any catastrophic warming occurs. Why should he care?
"We have taken up arms in defense of our liberty, our property, our wives, and our children; we are determined to preserve them, or die."
- Captain Moroni - 'Address to the Inhabitants of Canada' 1775
_DoubtingThomas
_Emeritus
Posts: 4551
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:04 am

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _DoubtingThomas »

DarkHelmet wrote:Trump will be dead long before any catastrophic warming occurs. Why should he care?


Trump and the Republicans in congress.
_MeDotOrg
_Emeritus
Posts: 4761
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:29 pm

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _MeDotOrg »

Hopefully Mar a Lago will be an aquatic park in the 21st Century.
"The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization."
- Will Durant
"We've kept more promises than we've even made"
- Donald Trump
"Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist."
- Edwin Land
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _Chap »

EAllusion wrote:The Trump admin released a report predicting a 7 F / 4 C degree warming by the turn of the next century assuming no course correction. That's well within the range of catastrophic change. It did so in a report attempting to justify freezing Obama fuel standards by arguing reduced carbon emissions from this action will just be a drop in a bucket. The "drop in the bucket" logic relies on assuming that the rest of the planet takes no action and catastrophic warming is therefore inevitable.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... 11163cfe55

See:

The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model Year 2021–2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

July 2018

Docket No. NHTSA-2017-0069


They say, in particular:

5.4.1.1 Global Carbon Budget

In response to public comments received on prior NHTSA EISs, the agency has considered the GHG impacts of its fuel economy actions in terms of a global carbon “budget.” This budget is an estimate for the total amount of anthropogenic CO2 that can be emitted to have a certain chance of limiting the global average temperature increase to below 2°C relative to preindustrial levels. IPCC estimates that if cumulative global CO2 emissions from 1870 onwards are limited to approximately 1,000 Gigatonnes (Gt) C (3,670 Gt CO2), then the probability of limiting the temperature increase to below 2°C is greater than 66 percent (IPCC 2013b).28 It should be noted that since this report was published, various studies have produced estimates of the remaining global carbon budget; some estimates have been larger (Millar et al. 2017) and others have been smaller (Lowe and Bernie 2018). These estimates vary depending on a range of factors, such as the assumed conditions and the climate model used. Because of underlying uncertainties and assumptions, no one number for the remaining global carbon budget can be considered definite.

Using the IPCC estimated carbon budget, as of 2011, approximately 51 percent, or 515 Gt C (1,890 Gt CO2), of this budget had already been emitted, leaving a remaining budget of 485 Gt C (1,780 Gt CO2) (IPCC 2013b). From 2011 to 2015, CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, cement production, and land-use change totaled approximately 50 Gt C (183 Gt CO2), leaving a remaining budget from 2016 onwards of 435 Gt C (1595 Gt CO2) (CDIAC 2016). Under the No Action Alternative, U.S. passenger cars and trucks are projected to emit 23 Gt C (83 Gt CO2) from 2016 to 2100, or 5.2 percent of the remaining global carbon budget. Under Alternative 1, this projection increases to 25 Gt C (91 Gt CO2) or 5.7 percent of the remaining budget.

The emissions reductions necessary to keep global emissions within this carbon budget could not be achieved solely with drastic reductions in emissions from the U.S. passenger car and light truck vehicle fleet but would also require drastic reductions in all U.S. sectors and from the rest of the developed and developing world. In addition, achieving GHG reductions from the passenger car and light truck vehicle fleet to the same degree that emissions reductions will be needed globally to avoid using all of the carbon budget would require substantial increases in technology innovation and adoption compared to today’s levels and would require the economy and the vehicle fleet to substantially move away from the use of fossil fuels, which is not currently technologically feasible or economically practicable.

So that's all right, then ...

Maybe now it's time to start looking at what 'technologically feasible or economically practicable' ways there are of coping with global warming of the range likely to occur if the Trump administration succeeds in junking all attempts at planet-wide carbon emission reduction?

Oh dear. Hasn't the Trump administration set out to stop government agencies making any plans of that kind?
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _EAllusion »

The shift from, "Climate change science is unreliable and probably a hoax," to "World's screwed buddy. No use trying to fight it," is amazing.
_honorentheos
_Emeritus
Posts: 11104
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:17 am

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _honorentheos »

Around 10 years ago I participated on a small, by invitation Mormon-related board where the subject of climate change would come up. What surprised me were the number of participants whose view was humans would develop tech to solve the problem once it got serious enough to be profitable to address. One would go so far as to argue we'd figure out how to terraform Mars by the time it got that bad, so as a species we'd just leave this world and go to a new one that we scientifically modified to be suitable for living on. That was frustrating. How does it make sense to imagine it being easier to change an entire planet to suit our needs but not work on tech that did not require the use of carbon-emitting fuels or reversed the effects of greenhouse gases here?

The line of reasoning above (we're screwed anyway, so don't expect us to change) seems like a version of the same. At it's core, it is a form of cultural procrastination.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Trump admin predicts 7 degree warming

Post by _Themis »

honorentheos wrote:What surprised me were the number of participants whose view was humans would develop tech to solve the problem once it got serious enough to be profitable to address.


While we need to lower as much as we can, reality is we will have to use some kind of tech to remove both CO2 and methane as modern societies can probably can never get to zero emissions.
42
Post Reply