Comments on: Adapting To Climate Change.

By: Greg

Greg — Tue, 28 Feb 2023 08:04:48 +0000

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l2UktJtKpFw

By: CHRIS+TROTTER

CHRIS+TROTTER — Mon, 27 Feb 2023 20:55:18 +0000

Encouraging news, Nukefacts. There may be hope for us yet. Even so, when it comes to human-beings’ capacity to act in their own long-term interests, I remain a pessimist.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:04:38 +0000

“then we would become so profitable as a country that all above could be funded easily.” yeah but, as soon as the country makes good profit per person the powers that be want mass immigration and lowered labour cost. Imagine the wealth each citizen would have if the population had been maintained at 3 million.

By: bert

bert — Thu, 23 Feb 2023 06:08:41 +0000

Immature.

By: Gus

Gus — Thu, 23 Feb 2023 06:08:12 +0000

Who were the same fucks from 2004 to 2017? predominantly National.

By: bert

bert — Thu, 23 Feb 2023 06:05:52 +0000

Oops Bob no the first, or is it No the first Bob?

By: Tui

Tui — Wed, 22 Feb 2023 11:01:07 +0000

In reply to Andrew.

@Andrew “that the Lithium, Nickel, Chromium, Copper, Neodymium and in particular Cobalt ores simply aren’t there to be mined at the rate we need them.”

Agreed, add that collectively Russia, Belarus and Ukraine are major exporters of a number of those (including 1st for Nickel and 2nd for refined copper), so major parts of the resources we do have are going offline.

Further the green tech material supply chains link to dozens of countries (many unstable) with widespread trade routes. So as deglobalisation continues it will become harder to guarantee the existing supply let alone supply at the volumes required for an EV revolution.

Absent new sources of raw materials or new technology, I suspect securitisation and conflicts for resources in green tech manufacturing are on the cards. Due to the numbers of nations and trade routes involved will be order of magnitude more complicated than the oil wars since WW2.

We need adaptation including new tech. The chances of an EV revolution with current geopolitics and technology is zero. As is being carbon neutral by 2050 without the global economy deindustralising.

By: Bonnie

Bonnie — Wed, 22 Feb 2023 08:30:18 +0000

I see that Beef & Lamb publish this (8 November 2022) “The calculation using GWP* for the period 1998 to 2018 showed that when taking into account sequestration — trees and other vegetation on farms absorbing emissions — New Zealand’s sheepmeat is arguably “climate neutral” and New Zealand beef is also well on the way towards that.” while Agresearch publish this “Another important characteristic of NZ sheep and beef farms is carbon sequestration by trees on-farm. The study showed that net carbon sequestration by trees within farms was significant and equated to 29 per cent of the total on-farm GHG emissions (based on the GWP100 metric). However, these results should be treated carefully since there is no international agreement on how to use these factors in footprint calculations.” in it’s reference to the study.
Claiming a 40% reduction per Kg of meat produced is about as valid as my claim to get 500 Km/Liter but not mentioning that I siphon the neighbor’s cars at night so I don’t include their fuel in the calculation.
Animal nutrition is well understood & I started my working life at DSIR Grasslands so while I believe small improvements are happening to get a 40% change has to involve some sort of magic.

By: esoteric+pineapples

esoteric+pineapples — Tue, 21 Feb 2023 10:06:00 +0000

Adaption isn’t going to work if we keep putting more and more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. It’s not like the temperature is going to go up and then stop after a couple of degrees. Without any limits on greenhouse gas emissions, adaption is not a solution. It just prolongs the dying process.

By: Basil Brush

Basil Brush — Tue, 21 Feb 2023 06:36:32 +0000

The coming climate stresses (stresses, a grotesque understatement) are going to invoke new forms of natural selection in humans. The mitigaters look like strong candidates for erasure from the race of Homo Not So Bloody Sapiens After All. Build flood barriers and retreat is your sole strategy? While fuelling the accelerating violence of climate change with the old normal? Hah! We see the congenital short-termism of humans at play here – do what’s convenient, not what’s necessary – humans fatally unable to recognise the vicious new assault on our ways of living and other hubristic absolutes.

Sure, secure our lands and lifestyles on the flood plains and fire fronts of today. People need places to live and work. But how do you imagine these defences will cope when the melting Arctic ice sheets lift sea levels by 5 metres? Sooner then predicted. Or when the Antarctic ice sheets melt raising sea levels by 50 metres? Or when the tsunamis of desperate displaced humans arrive? Or when the natural systems we’ve violated for so long no longer support us? Retreat? Yes but you haven’t even attempted to deal with the root cause of the crises, even when you had a chance to do that on your own terms.

Mitigate by all means but treat that as winning a breather alongside contemplating the radical behaviour changes you still have time to make before the climate holocaust makes them for you.