The rapid evolution of the El Nino-La Nina cycles should be a cause of concern.
Catastrophic, cataclysmic climate change may be much closer than we all think.
Altering of global ocean currents is a major concern, as it drives the Earth's weather patterns.
Changes in the Jet stream and the recent aberrant movement of the polar vortex may portend this.
If these currents are already shifting, then we are late in our action.
Waiting for a temperature rise may not be a wise strategy
International plans to change global warming over 10 or 20 years may be too slow an undertaking.
Do we need to act in a radical way today? Now....2018-2019?
Do we wait for our Leaders to 'Lead'?
Does any of you conduct research in this area? Apparently, the greenhouse effect is an irreversible process. the only thing that can be done is to slow down this process and thus adverse weather anomalies, unusual atmospheric phenomena, disasters caused by climate change. The development of industry based on traditional energy sources, ie burning of minerals, still dominates in many regions of the world. In domestic terms, the management of economies often boils down to economic growth, development of the industry without taking into account environmental protection issues and analysis of greenhouse gas emissions. In national economic policies, the tendency of the race is dominating for a higher number of economic growth, and the negative effects of this growth are forgotten. An attitude is assumed that the next generations are worried about how to solve this problem. Such an approach will accelerate only the negative effects of the global greenhouse effect and the emergence of disasters and natural disasters about the sources of climate change in a larger part of the world. More and more often the question is asked: how can we stop this process only as this process of warming up of average temperatures on Earth could be slowed down? What scale of this downturn could be generated if mankind would start to take this problem seriously? Does any of you conduct research in this area? Has any of you developed a theoretical model that would answer the question: Will switching all energy, communication and industry to renewable energy sources and ecological technologies significantly slow down the greenhouse effect on Earth?
The topic is important so I invite you to continue the discussion.
Climate change: Are we already too late? Really, we answer the question very complex and challenging. We don't have any apparent limits to the extent of the critical beyond which we cannot go back. Until this moment, we cannot control the activities that effected on the environment, and we do not have the tools to reach a realistic expectation in the near future. But really, the change is clear, since 25 years ago in my city has a great river. Now I can only find a channel without water
I am no expert in this field, but it is an interesting discussion, affecting everybody's future.
I have a curiosity about it
I am interested in what all you experts say.
Please let the debate continue.
My own basic impression also , is that the CO2 rise alone, as a causative factor, is too simplistic a model.
Humans are causing damage to the Earth in many different ways. Is the quantum of damage enough to change the Earth in any way, including climate? Or does the Earth have the capacity to regenerate its vital resources and withstand Mankind's onslaught?
Do we need to change our way of living or can we go on as before?
I understand Prof Towe's view. But yet there are many scientists in the field that believe passionately in the CO2 hypothesis. Why is it not clear to them?
For outside observers [non-climatologists] like myself, my main question is: do we need to change the way we are living? Are humans destroying the environment?Will the population lifestyle choices we make now make a difference to future generations?
Whether it is CO2 or multiple other factors like pollution, habitat destruction, etc.
There are many scientists in the field that believe passionately in the CO2 hypothesis. Why is it not clear to them?
I agree with the idea, it not clear to them, therefore, we cannot find one answer to this issue
I think it is already late to contrast the global warming. Most country are changing their politics, getting ready to adapt to the changes, instead to try to contrst them. The feedback regarding the sea ice extention and the albedo changes will also accelerare the process during next decades. Anyway the climate system is a complex system and abrupt changes can occur suddenly.
It is too late, the evolution of climate change and its impact is faster than the state of the art of climate sciences . My opinion is that we are heading to disasters
I agree with this opinion is that we are heading to disasters but climate change not so late. Now most countries facing weather are different compared to ten years ago
Thank you for all the replies.
What do you all think is the best way forward?
There are two ways to reach the best way forward, one of these not under control that related to climate or Nature and beyond nature. The second we can say under control but not 100%. This way control human process. For example, some agricultural development (expansion plantation) has been described as “a poor substitute for natural forests.” It is accepted that the inevitable cause of greenhouse gas emission is the expansion of plantation with natural forests cutting and burning.
The change is slower than many predictions, but there is change and has always been change. The present change is occurring over four centuries and may continue for many more centuries.
To stop the present trend toward warming would require reducing fossil fuel burning to (1/7) of the present amount, based on studies of bioenergy potential.
Proposals of 25% reduction are not addressing the problem, while calling for disruption of the economy and massive spending on new studies.
There are remedies that are being applied in an economic way. The combination of biofuel including ethanol and butanol with wind energy has potential to replace a substantial part of the fossil fuel over a manageable time frame. These bring great benefits to the localities where they are applied, and will probably continue to develop.
A rapid rise of sea level is not likely to occur. Past changes occurred over thousands of years except in the several cases of a triggering event like asteroid impacts. One reason is the latent heat of ice moderates accumulation and depletion above sea level.
There was in the past discussion that part of the South Pole Ice might become unstable and slide into the ocean. That has largely disappeared from publications.
Too late or too early probably doesn't apply when the change in over a long time and the proposed remedy doesn't address the problem.
Jerry Decker The change is slower than many predictions, Dear Jerry if you are referring to global climate change, you are right but you should understand that the change is very high at regional levels especially in Africa. The predictions are lower than the observation in many cases.
What to do?. The only way to reduce the impacts of climate change is to invest in development of adaptation options. To invest in technology development, crop breeding (we used to talk about drought tolerant crops), we should not change and talk about temperature tolerant crops. Technology to fight the increase in pest diseases is urgently required
Kenneth M Towe
and Philbert Modest LuhungaI realize there are many opinions and much conflicting data. For that reason I tend to look at the nature of evidence, how good is the data and did the researchers bear the burden of proof.
In most environmental claims the researchers did not bear the burden of proof. They ask the opponents to develop the proof, which usually takes a long time to do.
Biofuel uses a lot of material that would not qualify for food. Example is grain damaged by mold. Food gets first choice on biomass because it pays a higher price. Biofuel takes what is left.
Biofuel differs from fossil fuel in that biology removes carbon dioxide from the air then puts I back into the air for a net increase of zero. Fossil fuel adds carbon dioxide to the air in hope that biology will remove it. For this reason I looked to the biofuel industry to learn how much of the carbon dioxide the researchers are projecting they could recycle.
In this context the biofuel researchers did bear the burden of proof, and concluded they could handle (1/7) of the present release of carbon dioxide in the extreme case of high priorities.
Everyone should realize that carbon dioxide is an antifreeze in water, and can melt the ice without raise of the temperature. It happens over a long period of time, which changes the response people make.
About wind power, a lot of disinformation has been printed. Wind mills don't kill many birds, because most birds don't usually fly that high. Other birds like geese don't seem to be hitting many wind mills.. Birds are killed more often by hitting plate glass windows. Windmills scare birds away locally including sea gulls and crows.
For wind I give the example of Nolan county in Texas with which I am familiar. The county has about 15,000 people and several thousand wind towers plus construction jobs, service companies and training programs. Wind power pays 18 million dollars a year rent to land owners, and another 12 million dollars a year as school taxes. The power goes to distant cities where it moderates the cost consumers pay.
There are other concerns about wind mills. They make a bit of noise, and make some turbulence in the air. Moving shadows are sometimes up setting. Also auto drivers are sometimes distracted. All of these and more must be addressed in each location. Some of the remedies are larger turbines on taller towers spaced further apart and benefiting a larger number of land owners.
Petroleum oil and gas are also produced in the same county, and the two industries coexist peacefully. Some petroleum companies invested in wind power.
I don't propose to replace petroleum with alternatives on any sort of a crash program. The conversion is being done when and where it is economical to do so.
The point I wanted to make is that the proposed programs and remedies of 25% CO2 reduction don't come close to fixing the problem, but still wreck the economy. On the other hand the economy is fixing the problem while bringing prosperity to places that most participate in it. And these conclusions are based on data from researchers who did bear the burden of proof.
The admonitions concerning climate change have certainly been a matter of great concern in recent years. It is easy to get struck by existential dread evoked by frightening evidence provided by concerned experts in ecology . Nonetheless, we should know that nothing else matters if we fail to do something about climate change because we are living at a critical cross-roads in the history of Earth. The phrase ‘save the planet’ is quintessentially important and has an impressive massage behind it. The human beings are on the brink of self harm by exploiting natural resources at record speed. This is not comforting but it provides us with a motivational alarm emphasizing the fact that it is high time for all of us to do something about climate change. To know how serious it is, just follow the international weather news on your TV screen.
we can see its impact allover the world and i fact today is late so we must start at this moment.
Dear Dr. Segun Michael Abegunde, yes late but not too late. Today we have a choice, but the next day we do not have any chance, continuing emissions and also with uncontrol the human process will cause further warming and changes in all components of the environment system.
We are already too late yet emission from anthropogenic source keeps increasing.
Depends on the type of change and I think we are late but not much .
The limit is under 2ºC. We have to stop before. The best model would be the Montreal Protocole.
https://www.state.gov/e/oes/eqt/chemicalpollution/83007.htm
Montreal Protocol: targets ozone depleting chemicals
What do people think of this?
Mr. Towe.
1.0 deg C is a mean temperature increase for the whole planet. In many places this warming have been 3-8 deg C. In fact,
we seem rather to be close to a cliff in terms of dynamical attractor of the climate system. If we want to maintain the climate on a trajectory which is stable, we have to limit the temperature rise to less than 2 degrees C, otherwise the stability of the climate system could be driven into what is so-called "Hothouse Earth" with multiple positive feedbacks and warming accelerating drastically. 16 scientists from differents countries brought together the attached article published recently in PNAS.
The following article, just published, shows that the probability of temporarily exceeding 1.5 degrees of global warming, is now already significant:
Article Predicted Chance That Global Warming Will Temporarily Exceed 1.5 °C
Best regards
Adam
This discussion is turning out to be very interesting. Thanks to the contributors so far.
Perhaps something to agree on- Humans should be looking at ways to reduce their destruction of natural resources?
'Climate change', whether man-made or part of a natural cycle, seems inevitable.
Do we need to start talking about adaptation to a changing world?
I think we are going towards extremes. But still we can stop our planet from disaster.
I believe that we are on a level, where the damage is irreparable, but that we can do everything possible to stop the progression of this, I am disappointed in a certain way, with the human race, we are ungrateful to our planet
Climate change and development of any country are related to each other. So we can not stop development. Development i.e industrial, automobile, space research, road railway, Livestock, poultry industry and agriculture where lot of energy is required. Hence it will create certain negative effect on mean state of climate through emission of GHGs. Hence already we all experiences climate change through rainfall, temp, humidity, storm, earthquake etc. We are not late now we have to do for sustainable development by different ways
e.g Development of alternative sustainable livelihood approach; Educate and give training to people regarding climate change and its effect; organize camp and provide scientific technical and managerial personnel for climate change mitigation
Not late but act now ...
So to change the emphasis of the question slightly:
For human adaptation to a changing world:
-do we need to re-think locations of farms and types of crops, to adapt to changing weather patterns.
- do we need to start thinking of moving Human Settlements to better locations?
- do we need to re-think our water storage and usage patterns?
-more?
Are we looking at inward re-exploration of Earth?
Fazleh Mahomed,
NO, adaptation must be on the same farms
NO, stay where you are and learn to adapt
Yes rethink on water storage
I believe that Anthony Giddens in "The politics of climate change" is right, when he thinks that many of the problems associated with climate change will not be resolved until the threats resulting from them become visible in everyday life.
Giddens' paradox affects every aspect of human response to climate change. Research indicates that most people are aware of the fact that these changes are a serious threat, but unfortunately only a small number are willing to change their way of life, their habits, etc.
So, I think, YES, we should act BUT I'm not sure how far our radicalism can go...
Dear Professor Towe,
Giddens said it's paradox. The nature of paradox is never silly or foolish.
I did not expect such a quick answer. I was expecting a thoughtful response. Disappointing ... Especially in such an extremely important topic as human habits and our human nature...
I strongly support the move to adaptation.
The difficulty is trying to predict which way climate will change on a regional level.
Human settlements usually follow the water sources. So that may be a good starting point.
Then look at crop types and regional weather patterns again.
I don't think we should hold back, but embrace change
Sania. Thank you very much for this David Suzuki's point of view.
According to recent studies, we are actually in a dangerous situation that planet earth goes into a climate trajectories called hothouse earth.
Read the following paper attached.
Regards
Does any of you conduct research in this area? Apparently, the greenhouse effect is an irreversible process. the only thing that can be done is to slow down this process and thus adverse weather anomalies, unusual atmospheric phenomena, disasters caused by climate change. The development of industry based on traditional energy sources, ie burning of minerals, still dominates in many regions of the world. In domestic terms, the management of economies often boils down to economic growth, development of the industry without taking into account environmental protection issues and analysis of greenhouse gas emissions. In national economic policies, the tendency of the race is dominating for a higher number of economic growth, and the negative effects of this growth are forgotten. An attitude is assumed that the next generations are worried about how to solve this problem. Such an approach will accelerate only the negative effects of the global greenhouse effect and the emergence of disasters and natural disasters about the sources of climate change in a larger part of the world. More and more often the question is asked: how can we stop this process only as this process of warming up of average temperatures on Earth could be slowed down? What scale of this downturn could be generated if mankind would start to take this problem seriously? Does any of you conduct research in this area? Has any of you developed a theoretical model that would answer the question: Will switching all energy, communication and industry to renewable energy sources and ecological technologies significantly slow down the greenhouse effect on Earth?
The topic is important so I invite you to continue the discussion.
Although some sources pretend greenhouse effect impact could be irrreversible (see ref below), I would like to think (being optimistic) that there still some hope for action. Because if we think this is too late, no good action will be done for this planet and this will exacerbate the problem. There is still time for reducing carbon footprint, recycling more, not wasting food and above all changing our behavior. For example, wasting food is totally unacceptable. Huge amount of food is thrown and buried creating new sources of methane (a powerful greenhouse gas). Any food can be recycled (our grandma knew a lot about it !). e.g. using food rest to prepare soups or feed poor people or animals, etc. Food Supermarkets throw a lot of food (they renew everything on a cycle of few days for marketing reasons ). This food can be recycled. At individual level, we should compost, adopt better ecological behavior and stop waiting for politicians to save the planet.
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-un-report-greenhouse-gases-carbon-dioxide-methane-sea-level-rise-global-warming-a8646426.html
YES, I feel so. BUT realization, motivation & action can still change the course to some extent. Rather than climatic issues hitting us straight, still damage control can be done
Eventhough A Roubichaud has disclosed wisdom of women of the past to reduce the gravity of pollution and climatic change, man should take wisdom from GOD of CREATION to obtain a NEW EARTH by renovation. We have failed in climatic control since 2000 years. Purity of water is lost eversince 4500 years. Polution started since 2500 BC. The climatic control secrets were obtained by Moses in 1450BC through his divine connection as described in the PENTATEUCH. Disobedience of man eversince 6100 years made the rule of death and decay and the subsequent pollution of water for last 4500 years.
GENESIS OF THE WATERS
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.” [Genesis 1: 1-2]. Genesis of water was in the beginning along with creation of the earth. This was the state of world in the beginning prior to creation from Genesis 1: 3 which reads, ‘And God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.’
The word ‘And’ denotes that (1) ‘the situation in the beginning’ remained quite a long time as in ‘Genesis 1: 1-2’ and (2) ‘all the happenings thereafter’ described from Genesis 1:3 onwards. Genesis 1 thus describes regarding ‘further creation-works of God’ or ‘How God made the world and everything in it’. This is evidenced by John 1: 1-3: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”
God made everything by the Word who was in the beginning with God. All things were made through the Word and without the Word nothing was made at all. The Epistle of Paul the apostle to Colossians 1:16-17 confirm the truth and fact of creations undoubtedly. There is no confusion about creation. God created all things by the Word of God. Genesis verse 1:1 and John 1: 1-3 coincide to bring out the truth of creation of the heavens and the earth. So all the verses of Bible put together depicts the truth and fact about God and His creations. Genesis of water was prior to everything on the earth and its environment.
Picture No 1
Usually, scientists (man or women of any culture or countries) try not to mix religion and science. This is not a productive idea. I think this is the reason why this debate stopped 2 months ago as soon as someone invoked religion (which cannot be proven: i.e. believe or not, no choice, right ?). Again, not a good idea to mix science and religion.
In Romania, the first decade of this century was marked by severe
meteorological events that continued also in the first three years of the
second decade, leading to severe effects: hot periods contrasting with frosty hibernal episodes, increasing violent blizzards, excessively rainy periods accompanied by dangerous phenomena of atmospheric instability (thunderstorms), as well as disastrous floods followed by prolonged periods of droughts having severe consequences for agriculture and other
economic and social sectors.
Ja ich habe darüber in einer anderen diskudion als totaler unwiser gesprochen. Da haben mich die kolegen kritiziett. Jetut höteich das die folgen in der natur viel grosser und schneller kommen als die fachmänner sagten. Ich bitte entdchuldigen sie mich!
Powerful El Nino events could indicate that we are near climate tipping point.
No it is not too late, but we are getting close.
https://www.livescience.com/63267-hothouse-earth-dangerously-close.html
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331076568_Global_Warming_Mitigation_Through_Carbon_Sequestrations_in_the_Central_Western_Ghats/stats
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323180165_Salient_Ecological_Sensitive_Regions_of_Central_Western_Ghats_India
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332331409_Sustainable_Management_of_Bannerghatta_National_Park_India_with_the_Insights_in_Land_Cover_Dynamics
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324650411_Geoinformatics_based_Valuation_of_Forest_Landscape_Dynamics_in_Central_Western_Ghats_India
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328734729_Conservation_and_Sustainable_Management_of_Local_Hotspots_of_Biodiversity
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230738894_Peri-Urban_to_Urban_Landscape_Patterns_Elucidation_through_Spatial_Metrics
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229826816_Empirical_patterns_of_the_influence_of_Spatial_Resolution_of_Remote_Sensing_Data_on_Landscape_Metrics
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318760929_My_Village_Biodiversity_Documentation_of_Western_Ghats_Biodiversity_through_Network_of_Students_and_Teachers
June 2019 marks the 43rd consecutive June and the 414th consecutive month with temperatures, at least nominally, above the 20th century average, according to NOAA. Both land and sea surface temperatures were the highest on record.
Yes we are too late to prevent climate change. It is time for adaptation. Unfortunately many of the world's poorest inhabitants live in low lying areas near rivers that often overflow their banks. These poor souls ill probably not have the opportunity to adapt.
Large rich cities like New York will probably need to start building sea walls soon.
“We have always lived through hot summers. But this is not the summer of our youth. This is not your grandfather’s summer,” said UN Secretary-General António Guterres, announcing the data in New York.
July 2019 was around 1.2°C warmer than the pre-industrial era, according to the data.
“All of this means that we are on track for the period from 2015 to 2019 to be the five hottest years on record. This year alone, we have seen temperature records shattered from New Delhi to Anchorage, from Paris to Santiago, from Adelaide and to the Arctic Circle. If we do not take action on climate change now, these extreme weather events are just the tip of the iceberg. And, indeed, the iceberg is also rapidly melting,” Mr Guterres said.
“Preventing irreversible climate disruption is the race of our lives, and for our lives. It is a race that we can and must win,” he underlined.
In order to understand climate change and after that we can cure it or minimize its effects, I think we need very much effort.
No it is unique can happen every 100 years or like that but the human activity increased the level of the temperature
Late, but on time. There are a lot of policies and measurements in order to avoid to overcome 1,5ºC.
Well climate skeptics were denying greenhouse effect and potential threat to humanity for so long that it is indeed getting late.
It reminds me lazy people who find excuse not to go to the gym after supper and when it is getting past 9pm then invoke that it is too late to exercise.
The technology is there to mitigate and slowdown climate change but when member of the congress in US and other countries are paid by petroleum companies not to take any action, there is not much you can do as a citizen
Ich glaube das wir nur zuschauer sind für das schäden das wie in der Natur gemacht haben. Wie haben nicht den willen etwas zu endern... alles ich nur profit ohne rücksigkeit fur die Natur...
I agree with you, This year already we see the impacts of climate change on rainfall pattern observed in western maharashtra. Most of the people living in Sangali, Kolhapur and Pune suffered due to flood. all these are due to climate change. so to reduce the effect the impact of cc on human, agriculture, livestock we have to start to tap un-conventional energy sources for the development of society because we can not stop the development. So every individual living in the society should aware about the misuse of nature. Try to minimise GHGs emission
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Atmospheric Sciences
- Climate Science
- Climate Change