I'm not sure I understand. Both ESG investing and DEI marketing are methods of extracting value from capital. Last I heard, insane far left radicals are demonstrably not capitalists. Consider how psychopathic plutocrats have known for centuries that spewing carbon into the atmosphere would eventually trigger catastrophic environmental destruction, yet did it anyway. This is likely less hoax than reality.
Also, evoking a narrowly defined postgraduate thought experiment is meaningless in this context.
Although it's encouraging to see industry being forced to respond responsibly to PFAS clean-up efforts, $10.3 billion is a drop in the bucket.
According to a recent report in The Guardian the Pentagon estimates remediation efforts at 50 military bases to be $31 billion, but the Environmental Working Group identifies 700 more PFAS-laden sites and estimates costs at tens of billions of dollars more.
No, but I think it's still too early to tell. There is still quite a bit of uncertainty over the total inventory of gas hydrates. Temperatures at the bottom of the North Atlantic have not yet moved as dramatically as those at 500 meters or less. Also, methane clathrate deposits in shallower waters in that region are not particularly voluminous.
Just spitballing, but could this be an artifact of a dramatically slowing Atlantic meridional overturning circulation? Regardless, it looks like an exceptionally hot dry summer for most of Europe.
Often, a society's awareness of mission critical issues is shaped by the language used to describe such events. And things never go well when urgency and denial are given equal value in the public arena.
In 100 years, the earth will be completely different. I am sad for the young who will live to see it all go down.
Climate change-induced migration began long ago. Since 2008, around 20 million people annually relocate as a result of changing climactic conditions. About a quarter of those migrate to other countries.
Yes, boats and submarines flood. And the conditions at both polar regions are changing more dramatically than anywhere else. There are lakes bubbling methane from melted permafrost in Siberia and Alaska. Norway is already too warm to have glaciers.
I agree that It is completely possible to transition to zero emissions in just a few years. The process would be painful, disruptive, and cost $50 trillion. There's a shot if it starts next week. It may be too late.
I don't think that flood-proof is a thing, but their heart is in the right place.
And it's true that with sufficient wherewithal, most problems could be fixed. The solutions are certainly non-trivial and will be unthinkably expensive.
I don't think it's suppression from the scientific community. It seems like over-moderation of results in order to ensure future funding for further research.
Thank you for sharing this. I've watched what has been released of the video series and I think it's very good work.
Thanks for this. I'm glad to hear from someone who can better express my own objections to Ms Solnit's views. Also, great links in Bendell's article.
This is profoundly good advice. Thank you, nickwitha_k.
What a thoughtful and heartbreaking piece. In many ways, your thoughts echo my own.
Thank you for sharing this.
I'm not sure I understand. Both ESG investing and DEI marketing are methods of extracting value from capital. Last I heard, insane far left radicals are demonstrably not capitalists. Consider how psychopathic plutocrats have known for centuries that spewing carbon into the atmosphere would eventually trigger catastrophic environmental destruction, yet did it anyway. This is likely less hoax than reality.
Also, evoking a narrowly defined postgraduate thought experiment is meaningless in this context.
Thank you.
When the honeybees are gone, humanity's demise is certain.
Although it's encouraging to see industry being forced to respond responsibly to PFAS clean-up efforts, $10.3 billion is a drop in the bucket.
According to a recent report in The Guardian the Pentagon estimates remediation efforts at 50 military bases to be $31 billion, but the Environmental Working Group identifies 700 more PFAS-laden sites and estimates costs at tens of billions of dollars more.
I quite agree and recommend everyone give this a read.
Do you have any objection to my pinning this post to the top?
No, but I think it's still too early to tell. There is still quite a bit of uncertainty over the total inventory of gas hydrates. Temperatures at the bottom of the North Atlantic have not yet moved as dramatically as those at 500 meters or less. Also, methane clathrate deposits in shallower waters in that region are not particularly voluminous.
Just spitballing, but could this be an artifact of a dramatically slowing Atlantic meridional overturning circulation? Regardless, it looks like an exceptionally hot dry summer for most of Europe.
Yes, India's functioning bar is at the top, yet their worry seems inappropriately low. Filipinos seem to be appropriately worried.
I don't think this will end well. Slow escalation will eventually lead to a cascade of chaos.
Often, a society's awareness of mission critical issues is shaped by the language used to describe such events. And things never go well when urgency and denial are given equal value in the public arena.
In 100 years, the earth will be completely different. I am sad for the young who will live to see it all go down.
Climate change-induced migration began long ago. Since 2008, around 20 million people annually relocate as a result of changing climactic conditions. About a quarter of those migrate to other countries.
I don't know why this is getting downvoted. It's clearly satire, folks. I especially like the part about wolves. Can we do that?
Temperatures up to 10C
Yes, it seems that there is solid data that polar bear populations are increasing.
Yes, boats and submarines flood. And the conditions at both polar regions are changing more dramatically than anywhere else. There are lakes bubbling methane from melted permafrost in Siberia and Alaska. Norway is already too warm to have glaciers.
I agree that It is completely possible to transition to zero emissions in just a few years. The process would be painful, disruptive, and cost $50 trillion. There's a shot if it starts next week. It may be too late.
I don't think that flood-proof is a thing, but their heart is in the right place.
And it's true that with sufficient wherewithal, most problems could be fixed. The solutions are certainly non-trivial and will be unthinkably expensive.
I don't think it's suppression from the scientific community. It seems like over-moderation of results in order to ensure future funding for further research.