Skip to main content

In a new scientific study by the journal Nature, researchers are predicting that current climate models fall significantly short of accurately predicting rises in global temperatures,  which they estimate could increase by 7.2 degrees Fahrenheit, (4 degrees Celsius)  due to a decrease in cloud cover brought about by increasing temperatures.

The study determined that a heating planet impacts the rate of cloud formation, thereby decreasing the amount of sunlight which is reflected, thereby cooling temperatures.

The latest news paints an ever more dire picture of worse case scenarios which spell out a nearly unphatomable scenario for a world which warms by 4 degrees and ups the ante significantly to negotiations which aim to curtail warming by 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius.

Identified resultant problems of food insecurity, water scarcity, climate refugees, and national and regional security issues are key issues, along with the impact of the severe melting of ice cover in both Greenland and the Antarctic.

With the publication earlier this year of its fifth assessment report, the ntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded with 95% certainty that human action was the major driver of global climate change.

"If this isn't an alarm bell, then I don't know what one is. If ever there were an issue that demanded greater cooperation, partnership, and committed diplomacy, this is it," U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said after the IPCC report was released.

At the current time, there are no plans for the IPCC to prepare a sixth assessment, according to a University of Coloroda, Boulder, scientist who participates in the studies.

11:00 AM PT: Hopes are that this post will generate some aggressive ideas on what we have to do in 2014 to address this individually, locally, regionally.  My ideas are that we link up with Transition Towns networks in our areas AND that we work with 350 local. Also, note that Post Carbon Institute's Energy Bulletin into Resilience.www.resilience.org/. Great resources here!

Originally posted to boatsie on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:12 AM PST.

Also republished by Deborah Phelan.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (126+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    marleycat, Richard Lyon, Polly Syllabic, Glen The Plumber, kharma, limpidglass, anodnhajo, Mary Mike, NYFM, LI Mike, don mikulecky, Gooserock, Steven D, blue jersey mom, ColoTim, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, jbob, Darmok, James Wells, kevinpdx, rb137, citisven, bnasley, Sylv, Nowhere Man, Burned, Don midwest, cwsmoke, Egalitare, this is only a test, elwior, maggiejean, cordgrass, northerntier, willyr, WarrenS, Shockwave, sunny skies, Meteor Blades, FishOutofWater, greenomanic, linkage, bkamr, One Pissed Off Liberal, Laurel in CA, White Buffalo, blueyedace2, newpioneer, Syoho, bobswern, No one gets out alive, ask, Sunspots, flowerfarmer, IndieGuy, enhydra lutris, SeaTurtle, Teiresias70, LakeSuperior, wxorknot, marina, nice marmot, Mokurai, IowaBiologist, Heavy Mettle, Pakalolo, Assaf, Ashaman, Danno11, eeff, RFK Lives, gnosticator, tonyahky, monkeybrainpolitics, cotterperson, Lady Libertine, samanthab, rbird, NJpeach, Bluebirder, nirbama, MadMs, Dragon5616, skybluewater, Leftcandid, NoMoreLies, Lefty Coaster, sturunner, peregrine kate, jamess, CA ridebalanced, Ice Blue, emmasnacker, Horace Boothroyd III, Ree Zen, RWood, copymark, Lily O Lady, some other george, blueoasis, wordwraith, Grandma Susie, defluxion10, Eric Blair, cai, petulans, jadt65, Just Bob, 2thanks, YucatanMan, KJG52, atana, kj in missouri, reflectionsv37, PrometheusUnbound, blackjackal, Creosote, doinaheckuvanutjob, northsylvania, Calamity Jean, BeninSC, davidincleveland, LaughingPlanet, amyzex, cocinero, slowbutsure

    RIP Nelson Mandela

    by boatsie on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:12:06 AM PST

  •  Predictions about the climate future (47+ / 0-)

    do not appear to have had any discernible impact on actions to take preventive steps sufficient to have any results. Very few people who are alive today will be alive in 2100. That makes it easy to just kick the can. Their decedents will get to find out what the exact effects of global warming are.  

    •  Sadly (and tragically) True. (14+ / 0-)

      If debugging is the process of removing bugs, then programming must be the process of putting them in.

      by kharma on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:22:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  what truly scared me was the IPCC (25+ / 0-)

        uncertainity about publishing a sixth report. I actually had a talk with one of the contributing scientists in of all places a line at SFO, who said right now there are no plans for another study because governments aren't sure they want one.

        He painted a very frightening picture of climate modelling limitations and said that the most interest right now is in regional models.

        RIP Nelson Mandela

        by boatsie on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:25:21 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Do you think that there is some (7+ / 0-)

          level of prediction that would change public and governmental attitudes? If there isn't what is yet another report going to accomplish?

          •  just look how long and involved these reports are (17+ / 0-)

            it took six years between 4 and 5. The failure of media, partiularly US to follow this is so key.  This scientist said there was not one US media source in Geneva when they released the latest installation of the report.  He said without aggresssive media action, there is no way the public can assert enough pressure on govenment.

            The CD machine has been so successful here.

            And one could say the same, and is how I felt in Warsaw and long before in fact, about the UNFCCC process.

            The fact that Ban ki-Moon is holding his own summit and deciding who is coming is a major statement!

            RIP Nelson Mandela

            by boatsie on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:40:32 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  failure in the politics (8+ / 0-)

            not in the science. There has been a sea change (and it has been caused and championed by the US right wing) - on the political perception throughout the west. Against international cooperation of any kind.  That is what goes wrong here. The science is clear and could only be painted in ever more detauil, that matters nothing. What matters is that the idea that the world can be managed by international political cooperation has gone down the drain.

            This was engineered consciously by the US neoconservative wing for ideological reasons, and has been its most pervasive, and most damaging success.

            In terms of actual power the US has quickly encountered its limits, it cant rule the world. But what it could do is destroy the idea of cooperation in true mutual interest, as this itself had been for long time an American championed thing, going back to the original UN, which was the American attempt to organise the world for peace.

            Now, there are large international actors who are too large to be ruled by the US, take China, Russia, Japan even Brazil if need be or Germany. but alone, any of them cant organize the world either, so they all have fallen back on the concept of fending for themselves, in their own particular interests. They try to do their bests for themselves and Germany´s example shows that that can carry them quite far, especially in decarbonising their economy.

            But the world wide climate challenge can be overcome only together or not at all. And since the US, that had rightly been called the indispensable nation by old Albright, has decided to go on strike against common sense, nothing will be done about the climate, and the world will suffer it in all the severity it will bring.

            Even though all people share in the blame obviously since we all pollute, the US really has deserved special contempt for destroying the belief in common shared interest precisely when the world would have needed it most.  
             

            •  Things unfortunately have to get worse (13+ / 0-)

              China is a case in point.  They seem to have decided that climate effects, air and water pollution are the way to reduce their population, rather than controlling births.  I think it is clear that the Earth's population exceeds its carrying capacity, and am afraid that many elites seem to see climate disaster as a means of decreasing the population by 50-90%.  Whether the world's poor and middle classes will stand for this is yet to be seen.

              In the US there are many good signs, for example electricity usage is way down, as is gasoline consumption.  Coal is fast becoming obsolete.  The real problems are tar sands and fracking and their attendant environmental damage.  With a more concerted educational effort, people would conserve even more.  But getting the fossil fuel barons to agree to leave it in the ground is going to be really hard.  Unless the damage becomes unsupportable in key areas of the country, and I don't want to wish that on anyone.

              That said, I would also predict more disasters for 2014, as well as a widening division between the states with good education, health care and conservation programs and those that tell their citizens to rely on prayer.

              Don't bet your future on 97% of climate scientists being wrong. Take action on climate now!

              by Mimikatz on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 03:35:00 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Brilliant solution to global warming! No reports (10+ / 0-)

          means nobody knows what's happening ... ergo NOTHING IS HAPPENING TO THE CLIMATE.
          The outsized ego of mankind to think it can handle anything the planet throws its way is exactly like the attitude of the 1% --- they had absolutely no help in achieving their dominance, their incredibly fertile environment of wealth, political connection, luck, etc had nothing to with it.
          Such with man ... we've come to believe we can exist without the complex and living environment we are born into. Right now, right here, today, we have assured the end of civilization on this planet in 100 or so years.

          Ash-sha'b yurid isqat an-nizam!

          by fourthcornerman on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 03:02:22 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  The Issue is Ownership's Ability to Adapt (16+ / 0-)

      regardless of the fate of the rest of us, and not the year 2100. It's not going to hurt them too badly so they're going to keep on driving the problem.

      Climate is changing right now; Hurricane Sandy is one example of a disaster directly attributed to climate change because of being steered inland rather than out to see by a blocking N Atlantic high associated with warming arctic.

      There are going to be more and more effects on more people but they're already affecting our lives today.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:42:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Even now they are probably (4+ / 0-)

        staking the prime beach front property in Greenland.

      •  Decision-makers already know these facts (8+ / 0-)

        Munich Re issued a report in 2012:

        The number of natural disasters per year has been rising dramatically on all continents since 1980, but the trend is steepest for North America where countries have been battered by hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, searing heat and drought, a new report says.

        The study being released today by Munich Re, the world's largest reinsurance firm, sees climate change driving the increase and predicts those influences will continue in years ahead, though a number of experts question that conclusion.

        Whatever the causes, the report shows that if you thought the weather has been getting worse, you're right.

        As w/ so many other issues these days, the only people from whom the truth is being concealed is the ordinary citizenry.  It's the Col. Jesup strategy--We can't handle the truth!

        Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream of things that never were and ask why not?

        by RFK Lives on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 02:59:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Getting pretty close for comfort (19+ / 0-)

      A child born today will be 86 then. Those who scream about all the federal programs that are going to bankrupt our children and grandchildren need to consider the possibility that we will, instead, manage to leave our grandchildren a world of resource wars and starvation.

      “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

      by Catte Nappe on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:56:58 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The planet's ecosystems will die long before (8+ / 0-)

      2100, and most species extinct by then. The world's ecosystems are in crisis now, as are the oceans as ecosystems. They won't survive another 80 years. I'll give it until 2050.

    •  Actually, it's not true (8+ / 0-)

      The AVERAGE age of survival of those born this year, 2014, in many of the advanced countries, is at or above 86, the years remaining to 2100.  The temperature increases predicted are expected in the 2091-2100 timeframe, which means as early as just 77 years from now, earth will be 7 degrees F or more above today's norm.  Most countries have AVERAGE age of survival at or above this number of 77 years.  That means, of babies born this year, on average, half to well over half will be alive in 2091-2100.  That is, of course, only true if the predicted temperature rise does not result in a massive increase in mortality.  This also discounts gains in average age of survival.  So when you look at your babies--whether your sons and daughters or grandchildren--odds are many of them will be alive to remember you and your generation as having destroyed their planet and their future.  We can now, right now, look into the eyes of those who will suffer from our inaction, those who are most intimately related to us.  They will remember us and our legacy, whether it is one of action to save them and their future, or condemn them.

      “Poverty is not an accident. Like slavery and apartheid, it is man-made and can be removed by the actions of human beings.”-- Nelson Mandela

      by monkeybrainpolitics on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 03:24:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not that few, if we act (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean
      Very few people who are alive today will be alive in 2100.
      My son is 8. My dad is 88. My son will be 88 in 2093, and 95 in 2100. That's assuming he lives that long. But a lot of people today live into their 80s and 90s. One of his great-grandmothers made it to 93. Many children born in the last few years in America can expect to be alive in 2100, especially with medical advances. Many if not most Americans alive today have children or grandchildren who can expect to be alive in 2100.

      That's assuming we get climate change under control, as an urgent project, and very soon. Otherwise very few will be alive then, and most of those who are will be less than happy about it.

      •  That's assuming healthcare (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LI Mike, Creosote, Calamity Jean

        Part of the reason that my son's grandmother will live  til 90 is because of modern medicine and Medicare. How many of those in my generation will see such care, if we cannot depend on the Federal government to pay for it?

        The certain way to cull American society of its poor and impoverished formerly-middle class is to change the eligibility, coverage or even existence of Medicare. The Baby Boomers will show a dramatic drop in lifespan once they have to pay for their treatment out-of-pocket.

        Those that can survive because they have the money to will explain to their progeny that their existence is the result of "survival of the fittest." They can proudly pint to the destroyed ecosystem of the planet and say, "We sacrificed this in order to accrue the wealth that made your survival possible."  What do you think the reaction of their grandchildren will be?

        They say "cut back" - we say "fight back"!

        by Louise on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 08:25:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  How can we look our children in the eyes now? (0+ / 0-)

      If these predication occur (or end up even worse), my daughters (18 and 11) will live to endure this horrifying future world.  They will suffer.  Their children (if they have any) will suffer more. I cry many nights knowing this.

      I am 47 years old.  Anyone 50 or so and younger will be dealing with this one way or another.   How do you look your children in their eyes when you know their world is likely to be unlike any future they are dreaming of now?  

      We are all fools.

      The priest said, "Today's sermon is called 'Liars', but first I have a question. How many of you have read Chapter 66 in Matthew?" Nearly every hand went up. "You're just the group I need to speak to," the priest said. "There's no such chapter."

      by Back In Blue on Wed Jan 01, 2014 at 02:16:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'm so glad I was born when I was. (9+ / 0-)

    What we have done is horrible.  I will not live to see the worst.

    An idea is not responsible for who happens to be carrying it at the moment. It stands or falls on its own merits.

    by don mikulecky on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:32:15 AM PST

  •  Looks like we join the proverbial frog (7+ / 0-)

    In the pan of boiling water unless thousands get active with Climate Reality Project or 350.org. If more activism doesn't spring from the grassroots I don't see our head-in-sand politicians doing much.

    •  It has to be local/regional action (11+ / 0-)

      the most inspiring event I attended at COP19 was by international group of mayors. They are really accomplishing some great things.

      RIP Nelson Mandela

      by boatsie on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:43:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yep. Best to do local-regional networked and... (5+ / 0-)

        ...coordinated with national and international.

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 12:19:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes: think globally, act locally AND on all levels (0+ / 0-)

          as McKibben says, we can't save ourselves one light bulb at a time, nor one city at a time - it has to be one planet at a time.  But to get to that time, we need much stronger organizing ASAP, starting locally where we can reach people face to face.  
          To scale up to global, we need visible models of low-GHG alternatives working in practice, which we can create at the local level first. But we will need to get out of our comfort zones and evangelize to people who are being disinformed by the corporate he said/he said media, or we'll all be boiled frogs.

          In particular we need to explain very forcefully that extreme weather events result from a combination of random variation and long term changes.  Since the extreme events are outside the historic range of random variation, the clear long term forcing factors (GHGs and deforestation) are responsible for the visible difference between discomfort and destruction.

          Note that this report, like "1984", is not a prediction but a warning: it shows the probable consequences of allowing GHGs to double, which clinches the case against "unburnable carbon" - proven reserves of fossil fuels we must leave in the ground.  Organize locally to divest from fossil folly, and make Obama abandon "all of the above" while working as Joe Romm says to "deploy, deploy, deploy" efficiency and renewables locally.

          There's no such thing as a free market!

          by Albanius on Wed Jan 01, 2014 at 03:07:54 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  happy new year cutie! (7+ / 0-)

    took a minute break from lawsuit madness to say hi!

    will call later this week when things hopefully calm down!

  •  2100: The Malia Sasha Horizon (8+ / 0-)

    an earlier postregarding what the 2100 world looks like worst and BEST case scenarios based upon the 4th IPCC report.

    Even if we are aggressive, the map sure is terrifying.

    And at this point, what does aggressive look like? I think we need to start turning off the power at dusk based upon a rigorous rethink of what is involved in sustainability.

    RIP Nelson Mandela

    by boatsie on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:52:38 AM PST

  •  As a child I used to wish I was born in the future (20+ / 0-)

    Just think of all the great new technology, the advances in medicine, the new discoveries about the universe, how realistic video games will be!

    Now as an adult I am glad that I may be living in one of the last few good generations (at least for the non-elite), and I weep for the future that current generations are leaving behind.

    I feel deep shame about what we are doing to our world and to our societies, and in a selfish way am glad that I will not be alive to hear how future generations curse us for our collective blindness to the obvious and for our utter greed.

    •  This is one of the saddest comments (11+ / 0-)

      ... I always wished I was born in the past, like the way past. Now I wish that more than ever.

      No matter how many times we note that men had no idea what would happen, there is truly no excuse for the power of the $ to ruin the future of the world.

      What amazes me most is just how little is being done by those who have amassed great wealth. How blinded they are by ambition and perhaps by the sense that their money can save their families.

      RIP Nelson Mandela

      by boatsie on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 11:03:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't feel shame. I am ENRAGED! (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blueoasis, Eric Blair, atana, Creosote

      Most of what we see happening now has been predicted and warned of for the past 40 years.

      Conscious effort has been made to suppress this knowledge so that profits for the shareholders would not be disturbed. Our old friend: simple, crass greed, and those enslaved to it have caused this catastrophe to happen.  It still is doing so.

      Humanity's future has been sold off so Paris Hilton can have a new gown.  

      don't always believe what you think

      by claude on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 06:25:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't you think the Corporatists KNOW this? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LI Mike, Creosote

        They probably have a better handle on the science than we do. They have known for decades where climate change was headed.  They must truly believe that they can amass enough wealth to shield them and their progeny for generations to come.

        What appalls me is that the Obamas must know, and yet he continues on as if nothing was happening. Think of all the thousands of CEOs, politicians, and heads of state who know the truth....and yet none of them says anything. Why the hell not?

        They say "cut back" - we say "fight back"!

        by Louise on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 08:33:20 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hope readers note the 7.2F is in a manner alarmist (9+ / 0-)

    in that it is about equal with the worst case scenario 4 degree Celsius which is usually used . I thought about changing header but then realized most of us probably think the 4 is F when it is actually C.

    Thus, I decided to let it stand, but qualify in first graph.

    RIP Nelson Mandela

    by boatsie on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 10:57:03 AM PST

  •  Sorry in advance, bc I know pessimism (9+ / 0-)

    is sometimes frowned upon, but in my opinion, the only chance we have is some discontinuous technological breakthrough. CO2-eating nano tech or some such.

    My uninformed gut tells me that's around a 2% chance.

    My more informed political gut tells me there is zero, none, nada chance of humanity slowing down ghg emissions for decades.

    •  Don't need nano... (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      maggiejean, WarrenS, denise b, wytcld, Louise

      Biology eats CO2, breakfast lunch and dinner every day. Industrial biology established a foothold in drug and fine chemical production years ago, and is taking off in the commodity chemical and energy industries now.

      ARPA-E's Electrofuels Program - http://arpa-e.energy.gov/... - has produced multiple approaches to making any carbon molecule in nature, including food, fuel, and commodity chemicals, from CO2 and renewable energy.

      I making a documentary, A Most Convenient Convergence, about the science and engineering in this field - http://www.youtube.com/... .

      My somewhat more-informed gut tells me chances are better than 50% because businesses using the progeny of the processes already shown will profitably replace the fossil fuel and petrochemical industries, and grab a huge share of world food production at the same time.

      •  Hope you're right; the stuff I've (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        engine17, Creosote, Calamity Jean

        read in that area, as the layest of layer persons, has not filled me with confidence though.

        •  Interviewed the Program Director... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          claude

          He agreed that the scientists and engineers of the Electrofuels Program are very probably significantly increasing the carrying capacity of the planet.

          To quote a famous US VP "This is a BFD!"

          •  invest heavily in spices and flavorings (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            engine17

            to make the bio-glop palatable.

            So far, what we see of wonderful new technology is that it results in wonderful new profits for capitalists while needing fewer and fewer people to do the work and get paid for it.

            We need a new philosophical paradigm as desperately as we need that new technology.

            don't always believe what you think

            by claude on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 06:36:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  New paradigm (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              claude

              If the tech works, we need the capitalists in order to spread it quickly.

              Agree though, I think we need another swing at the social contract.  I propose bio-glop without spices and a place to live provided by society for those who wish to meditate for a career, thirty-two hour work weeks, and that CEOs make no more than 50x the janitors at their companies.

              •  I fully support meditation (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                engine17

                as work deserving of a living wage.

                As important as the wage, however, is the dignity that should come even to those who only monitor the growth of grass and the songs of birds.

                don't always believe what you think

                by claude on Wed Jan 01, 2014 at 09:44:11 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe it's time for an in-depth update (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        engine17

        of your September 24, 2012, diary. How real are these nuts and bolts, and what are the possibilities that they can be connected and made to work?

        Having learned that a gallon of gas took 90 metric tons of ancient algae to produce, I now wonder how and where those metric tons will be taken out of circulation.

        There's a sort of chronograph at Seattle Center that by mid-December indicated that some 2,899,000 metric tons of carbon had been emitted in the area in 2013...

        •  Maybe its time... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Creosote

          ... for me to finish my damn movie!

          I don't have a lot of new information since my video interviews, but the little I have suggests things are moving forward.

          My film will include a look at some of the nuts and bolts, presented as well as I can. I'm working on a Kickstarter package to raise the money I need to finish; most will go to animators working on sequences to explain the science and engineering. I hope to go live on Kickstarter by the end of January.

  •  What to do next year? (14+ / 0-)

    Wow, where to start. For me, I'm going to pay attention to the (it seems to me) fact that little behaviors add up. I'm going to do a focused study on the climate impact of my own behavior. As much as I'd like to think I have a small footprint, it seems more likely that I'm willfully ignorant.

    As for bigger things -- the Congo Basin is in a lot of trouble, as you know. They've recently discovered oil under the National Park in the DRC, so that land is headed for more pillaging. Off the top of my head, I want to say that the Congo Basin contains 70% of the ground cover in Africa, nearly 20% of the rainforest in the world, and the second largest river on the planet. Imagine the climate impacts ahead...

    I am working with groups inside of Congo -- some women's rights groups, some doing grassroots conflict resolution, some doing environmental activism. These people are real heroes. I'm going to spend a lot of my time helping them.

    Happy New Year, Boatsie. :)

    "Broccoli could take down a government. Broccoli is revolutionary." --Kris Carr

    by rb137 on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 11:21:33 AM PST

  •  ELI5 how increased temp = lower cloud cover (6+ / 0-)

    Wouldn't more water evaporate into the air?

    not remotely denying anthro... anthro... however its spelled... climate change and i think we're almost certainly low-balling the effects, but i don't get the causality of more heat = less clouds.  

    Read the abstract but... my climate science sophistication level pretty much stops at hey-if-i-cross-my-eyes-that-cloud-looks-like-a-poodle.

    elipsii: helping the masses express aposiopesis for...

    by bnasley on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 11:27:54 AM PST

    •  From the abstract? (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bnasley, maggiejean, WarrenS, Creosote

      Here we show that differences in the simulated strength of convective mixing between the lower and middle tropical troposphere explain about half of the variance in climate sensitivity estimated by 43 climate models. The apparent mechanism is that such mixing dehydrates the low-cloud layer at a rate that increases as the climate warms, and this rate of increase depends on the initial mixing strength, linking the mixing to cloud feedback. The mixing inferred from observations appears to be sufficiently strong to imply a climate sensitivity of more than 3 degrees for a doubling of carbon dioxide. This is significantly higher than the currently accepted lower bound of 1.5 degrees, thereby constraining model projections towards relatively severe future warming.

  •  Pollution Rising, Chinese Fear for Soil and Food (11+ / 0-)

    Another aspect of the climate issue is the over use of the earth's resources.

    For a couple of decades China has not had drinkable water from the tap.

    Now this article from the front page of today's times that industrial pollution has harmed soil and food.

    China now burns most of the world's coal which is a terrible climate change agent.

    Thus the world's largest country, China, and now the largest user of carbon will sometime have to address that they are killing their own people with pollution. Not that they didn't kill 35 million people through various starvation actions of their communist leaders, but this new issue effects everyone.

    Pollution of the soil is cause and effect science. The climate deniers cannot spin this story.

    Article says that China has sampled soil and other stuff around the country but has not released results. Could a leaked report lead to a collapse of government?

    Like so many other problems that the global oligarchy has tried to sweep under the rug, this might be the year that people rise up.

    link to the article in NY Times

    Pollution Rising, Chinese Fear for Soil and Food

  •  If the temps will be up 7.2F by 2100 (21+ / 0-)

    that means they'll be at an unlivable level much sooner. It would be good to see projections for 2020 or 2030, as that might have more effect on people who don't think beyond their own lifetime. I think the time to bemoan our children's and grandchildren's future is over, we need to look at the here and now and take action. What we need is a complete overhaul of the industrial perpetual growth based system and mindset, but I just don't know if that's possible by mere persuasion. Others would argue there needs to be a more top down enforcement of low carbon living, but I'm personally not a supporter of telling people what to do, whether it's being vegetarians, not driving cars, not flying, or not having children. Authoritarianism always has its own unintended consequences, so I think what we're left with is a) on a personal level educate and inspire people about making the right choices and b) on a systemic level make sure the polluters no longer get away with externalizing the true cost of their pollution. The problem with that as we've seen at the COPs is that the nations with the most influence over such regulations are also the biggest polluters, so you really have the wolf guarding the henhouse here.

    Anyway, it's complex, but for me personally I'm going to be more focused on building the tools for ecocitizens around the world to be more vocal and become more impactful. More on that in coming diaries. We'll never get everyone to understand what's at stake, but if the people who do have a more prominent platform, we may be able to change the prevailing cultural DNA from that of being mindless consumers to active engagement in our physical world.  

    Ecology is the new Economy => Kosonomy

    by citisven on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 11:48:29 AM PST

  •  Public pension fidiciary responsiblity: (5+ / 0-)
    “This report reflects CalSTRS’ recognition that environmental issues affect the performance of the investment portfolio across companies, sectors, regions and asset classes. Since our last Green Team report, we have taken advantage of opportunities in clean energy production and transmission investments,” said CalSTRS Chief Investment Officer Christopher Ailman. “The integration of environment-focused investments is part of our fiduciary responsibility to secure the long-term financial future for generations of California’s educators. There are significant financial, legal and reputational risks involved and, as fiduciaries, it is an investor’s responsibility to work to mitigatethese risks”
    http://www.calstrs.com/...
    http://www.calstrs.com/...

    Investment fiduciaries (whose mandate is to act on behalf of their pensioners) seem to be one way to amplify the message - these investment staffs are legally bound to act with the best interests of their pensioners in mind in order to secure retirement benefits for millions of public employees. Well, what about those public employees homes and communities? What good is a retirement benefit, if you're community is under water, or suffering drought, fires, floods, rising food prices, etc.?

    Investors pulled out of South Africa. How about investors rally to support climate change investment/divestment.

    That can grab headlines and what public pensions do gets the general public's attention.

  •  Thank you boatsie for this (9+ / 0-)

    informative post. Your work on climate science is great. The predicament we are in now is awful, yet the voice of money speaks louder than ever. The denial that climate change is even happening or caused by human abuse goes along with the most recent Pew poll on evolution. I suppose that it won't be long before the moneyed class will convince republicans that since democrats believe it's a good idea to wear clothing, it's preferable to be naked.

    The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    by maggiejean on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 11:58:47 AM PST

  •  I have read proposals... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WarrenS, Calamity Jean

    albeit from right wing think tanks, that suggest pumping reflective particles up into the atmosphere in a similar way as volcanoes do, which could reverse global warming.  My visceral reaction was absolutely not.  The moment that happens, we would be responsible for every storm on earth.  Right now if there is a typhoon in the Phillipines, it is an act of God and no one is responsible.  If we start tinkering with the worlds weather patterns ON PURPOSE, then everything, every tornado, every flood, every wildfire or drought in the world becomes our fault.

    However, with the increasingly disasterous scenerios becoming more and more likely, I am beginning to wonder if such a drastic measure is our best hope for saving a livable planet (at least as far as humans are concerned).  Have their been computer models working on how such a solution would impact weather and life on earth in general?

    "Perhaps the sentiments contained in the following pages, are not YET sufficiently fashionable to procure them general favour..."

    by Buckeye Nut Schell on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 11:59:59 AM PST

    •  Besides that, there are other reasons. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JeffW
      My visceral reaction was absolutely not.  The moment that happens, we would be responsible for every storm on earth.
      First, because cooling the world with reflective particles in the atmosphere will not solve the ocean acidification problem, which is going to be bad enough.  Second, even if the reflective particles did bring temperatures down, they fall out of the sky in two or three years.  They would need to be continuously replenished.  If there was some problem that prevented the release of the particles for a few years, the temperature would shoot up even faster than it's doing now.  

      "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." -- Sen Carl Schurz 1872

      by Calamity Jean on Wed Jan 01, 2014 at 11:01:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  once again (8+ / 0-)

    scientist need some marketing help.  For the scientist this 7 degrees may send them into a pnic as they understand what it means, for the average person?  Not so much.  This is "global warming" all over again.  Global warming, hmm sounds nice.

    Here it is again.  &degrees in a hundred years... umm  yawn... yeah so what?  Average person will think, OK in a hundred years my great great grand kids will have 77 degree fall days instead of 70 degree, big whoop,  next....

    This science needs marketing, and it needs it bad.

    Where to start, how about, what are the extremes?  What will the hottest day on earth by like in 2100?  Will the tropics see 120 degree days? 130 degree?  For you to get the attention of the public these days, you have to head to the extremes of your point, and start there.

    7 degrees in 100 years... big whoop.. sounds like a nicer winter to me...

    •  Agreed about marketing. But the focus ... (10+ / 0-)

      ...should be on the effects of the 7.2° temperature rise, not the rise itself. There are a ton of these. Just two of them: a 40% reduction in corn, rice and all the other cereal crops plus a tremendous reduction in available potable water adding to the billion or so people who already find getting potable water difficult.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 12:31:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  really good points (5+ / 0-)

      I think rising sea levels, crippling droughts, devastating storms, and ravaging fires are more convincing arguments. However, we've had plenty of the latter three, and it doesn't seem to have done much in terms of people connecting the dots on a widespread enough level to demand action.

      Ecology is the new Economy => Kosonomy

      by citisven on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 12:36:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  "Marketing" is a fraud (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      citisven, marina, NoMoreLies

      Science really doesn't concern itself with fraud, except to point it out and expect the rational to understand and give it no credence.

      Marketing is what makes people pay a dollar for a plastic bottle of water.  

      Marketing is what makes people pay to ingest doses of lung cancer.

      Marketing is what makes people buy things that they don't need with money that they don't have.

      What science needs to do is to find out where the kill switch is for the human irrational thinking circuit.  Unless they find that switch and turn it off, this whole train is going off the cliff while people fight for a better view of the chasm below.

      •  marketing is about human behaviour (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        citisven, marina, wytcld, blueoasis

        this entire crisis is due to human behavior, so to correct it.. yep you guessed it... you better be able to correct human behavior.

        See marketing isnt a fraud, it works, it works so well you can make people pay a buck for water no cleaner than what comes out their faucets, all because of marketing via a picture of a mountain stream on a piece of plastic.

        If marketing is able to make billions of people do things, its the perfect tool to help in this crisis.

  •  if there is much left of humanity in 2100 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    citisven, WarrenS, Creosote, Calamity Jean

    my hunch is that we will be over that 7 degree temp. spike and it could be even higher. I wish I could be optimistic here, but just going by everything I have read about climate change, and this mainly in the excellent articles in Rolling Stone magazine.

  •  At best 2100 will be a Mad Max world (10+ / 0-)

    Mad Max photo MadMax_zpsc886c563.jpg

    At worst only cockroaches and rats will survive with a 7 degree increase.

    China will take over Siberia.  America will take over Canada.  Europe will take over Scandinavia.  There will be wars for Patagonia and South Africa..  Australians and New Zealanders will survive longer.

    I don't have progeny.  If I did I would be horrified.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 12:17:22 PM PST

  •  Welcome back Boatsie. I've been away, too (10+ / 0-)

    I wrote up a post that discusses some of the details of the climate science here.

    look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

    by FishOutofWater on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 12:40:51 PM PST

  •  can stuck in place economy help climate change? (8+ / 0-)

    Can the Stuck-in-Place Economy Help Us Face Climate Change?
    New studies show that people with deep roots in the place where they live are better equipped to handle upheavals of the type that come with climate change.

    Social scientists call it "place attachment": "the bonding that occurs between individuals and their meaningful environments," according to psychologists Leila Scannell and Robert Gifford. Based on several studies released in the last couple of years, place attachment is one of several factors that can help a community recover from, and individuals cope with, the kinds of social and environmental crises that are becoming ever more common—like climate change-related disasters, large-scale job layoffs, or political turmoil.
    In USA this means not leaving where you grew up and building on existing roots.

    A reminder - indigenous people can have an almost zero carbon footprint. farming by hand. buying food every day in the market and no refrigeration.

    •  China is still urbanizing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      citisven

      The U.S. has made some progress, but not enough to reverse the growth in China and developing nations.

      look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

      by FishOutofWater on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 01:44:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  America is land of the nomad (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Creosote

      I don't know the statistics but I'm willing to bet over half at least of the US population today no longer lives within 50 miles of where they were born and raised.
      What that tells me, just like white flight from the city, is that people will think they can just move away from whatever bothers or hurts them. I'm pretty sure a lot of "climate refugees" will be inside the US in the coming century, seeking better places to live. Remember the Dust Bowl days...

      Ash-sha'b yurid isqat an-nizam!

      by fourthcornerman on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 03:17:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  indigenous people aren't so innocent (0+ / 0-)

      The per-person carbon emission is far lower for tribal peoples. On the other hand, a large part of the world's population increase in recent decades is among basically tribal peoples, in African, India and so on, whose numbers are increasing due to improvements in medicine and agriculture. So while the per-person ecological load is still low there, the sheer numbers have led to run-away deforestation as traditional fuel use for cooking and heating strips the natural environment. As a secondary effect the black carbon from all those fires helps melt the glaciers it falls on, resulting in less sunlight reflected back into space, and over the longer term in the failure of major water sources downstream.

      If the world were full of indigenous peoples whose populations weren't rising rapidly, this would be an ideal situation, ecologically. The population boom in indigenous populations negates that. We can hardly deny them food and medicine. There are active programs to provide better stoves and lighting. But the only proven way to cut population growth is to bring people up to first-world living standards, or else enforce something like China's one-child policy. Meanwhile both birth control and abortion need to be promoted world-wide as moral goods, even religious imperatives. Some will claim this is "genocide" against tribal peoples. But is is genocide against tribal peoples over the longer term if this is not done.

    •  In the 1930s some people could return (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      boatsie

      to the family farm -- not possible now with so many formerly good farming areas paved and built over or merged into massive Big Ag enterprises. But how much does remain or can be reclaimed?

      Could small-scale farming and trades still be possible and sustainable?

      The car profoundly changed people's idea of distance and how much and how far food or materials could be carried on foot or even transported using animals.
      I wonder if there's time to begin to undo that kind of machine thought.

  •  The knowledge that... (9+ / 0-)

    ...it's going to be worse than we thought is no surprise to me.  I have always thought it was going to be worse than we thought.

    Thanks for your stellar reporting, boatsie.  It takes enormous courage to keep informing us all about this.

    Watch out for my new climate activism initiative, which gets its public unveiling tomorrow morning!

    Freedom isn't "on the march." Freedom dances.

    by WarrenS on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 01:04:21 PM PST

  •  Predictions of temperatures 87 years from now (6+ / 0-)

    Are way too vague for American media. What is needed is an estimate of what US coastlines will be submerged in 10 years,what wealthy communities will need to be protected from the oceans, which southern cities will be without drinking water, or have temps significantly higher. Generalities may be more accurate but they won't arouse the media or the govt to action like specifics about a particular place.

    Be bold. Be courageous. Americans are counting on you. Gabby Giffords.

    by Leftleaner on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 01:20:02 PM PST

    •  I'm getting the feeling we're not going to see (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      samanthab, Calamity Jean

      too much until it's too late. What event (or series of events) could transpire to make business sponsored media acquiesce to allowing Americans to get the full picture? How many would simply tune out?

      Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther

      by the fan man on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 05:37:53 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Tell southerners, from Texas east, that (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Leftleaner, JeffW

      it will be too hot and humid in the fall to play high school football.  Players will be falling down dead from heat exhaustion during practices and games.  

      "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." -- Sen Carl Schurz 1872

      by Calamity Jean on Wed Jan 01, 2014 at 11:11:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Pitchforks. Torches. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    citisven, WarrenS, scorpiorising, marina

    Those who are comfortable with the world the way it is now will have to be made...

    Uncomfortable.

    That's pretty much the only way big changes have ever come about.

    You can die a free (man) or live on your knees.

    REVOLT!!!


    The Fail will continue until actual torches and pitchforks are set in motion. - Pangolin@kunstler.com

    by No one gets out alive on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 01:26:27 PM PST

  •  No biggie, we just need to pray for clouds. (4+ / 0-)

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 01:40:25 PM PST

  •  If the temp went up 7 degrees it would be 6 here (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    the fan man

    at 3 pm so global warming can't happen too soon for me!

  •  The researchers said: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WarrenS, peregrine kate, Creosote
    The researchers found climate models that show a low global temperature response to carbon dioxide do not include enough of this lower-level water vapour process. Instead they simulate nearly all updraughts as rising to 15 km and forming clouds.

    When only the deeper updraughts are present in climate models, more clouds form and there is an increased reflection of sunlight. Consequently the global climate in these models becomes less sensitive in its response to atmospheric carbon dioxide. However, real world observations show this behaviour is wrong.

    When the processes in climate models are corrected to match the observations in the real world, the models produce cycles that take water vapour to a wider range of heights in the atmosphere, causing fewer clouds to form as the climate warms.

    My only question about the above claim is that there is no indication of segmentation of cloud formation dynamics covering three physical regimes.....cloud formation out over the oceans, cloud formation in ocean shoreline regions and cloud formation over land areas.

    In particular, the atmosphere over the oceans frequently contains highly stabilized conditions in the lowest boundary layer (about 3000 feet high) directly over the ocean's surface.   These stable boundary layers will restrict water vapor transport to higher elevations as such transport requires unstable atmospheric conditions that promote heat-induced convective development that is required both for cloud formation and for transport of water vapor to higher altitudes.

    The atmosphere over land and over coastal areas behaves with different dynamics.   There is much greater frequency of atmospheric unstability conditions that promote heating-related verticle convective development that leads to both cloud formation and verticle transport of water vapor to higher altitudes.

    I've not seen the paper but observations of cloud formation behavior and use of that phenomena to address global patterns of vertical transport of water vapor has to be modeled and integrated to address these important differences on land/water related affects on vertical transport of water vapor.

    •  Low-res models have ignored intermediate mixing (7+ / 0-)

      They included only deep convection. Thus, all the low level convection that didn't convect strongly was ignored. The mid-level mixing that leads to break up of low level clouds was ignored.

      Those stable inversions become less stable as the climate warms. Stratus clouds break up earlier in the day as the oceans warm and more heat is retained in the atmosphere by GHGs.

      The author of the article made a video that I embedded in my post.

      look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

      by FishOutofWater on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 02:24:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  You're going to give up the planet without a fight (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dianna

    ??? Weep...but then get busy to reclaim the planet for all the world's species.

  •  As recently as ten years ago, it was 60 degrees (5+ / 0-)

    in my parts in December, which was about 20 degrees or more above normal for December. At the time it was outlandishly bizarre and I was extremely worried about my animal having to deal with the heat in his heavy winter coat. He was fine, but these last few winters it's not even notable when the tempearture goes this high

  •  ~too clever for our own good~ (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    marina, blueoasis, Calamity Jean

    I'm going to take the cynical view and say that very little will be done to prevent this coming disaster.  The weather will become more and more volatile, thus wiping out large populations which will be hit by monster storms, creeping desertification, volatile crop harvests.  They will have a much more challenging time counting on the weather to feed themselves.

    The US which has for many years been the 'bread basket' of the world, it seems like they might not be able to deliver on a regular basis.  The crop harvest this year was really good, but that could change in coming years.

    The worst affected will be the countries around the equator, like sub-saharan Africa, countries with large populations like Pakistan, Bangla Desh, India and others which rely to a large extent on imported grains.  The poor will get hit the hardes.

    Expect a lot more food riots, political instability in many of these countries.

    *see Thomas Malthus' predictions about population growth.

  •  GAME OVER! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Creosote, Calamity Jean

    We lose.

    "If Wall Street paid a tax on every “game” they run, we would get enough revenue to run the government on." ~ Will Rogers

    by Lefty Coaster on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 04:32:10 PM PST

  •  climate change? ha. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wordwraith

    health care. marriage equality. abortion rights. Fox News. the 1%... at some point, we have to decide where to push forward.

    imo, we simply aren't focused on the real problems. that much ought to be clear by now. the cultural issues, no matter how credible and worthy, are used like chum and have taken too much of our energy.

    and when i say OUR real problems, i mean species threatening life-ending. not orphan diseases or cancer. 60 years ago, w.o. all this health care frenzy, we might have made a better stand. i don't know.

    i am talking food, water, air, temperature (real health care)... not what Harry Reid did at 5:03 today.

    good god.

    “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” Buckminster Fuller

    by pfiore8 on Tue Dec 31, 2013 at 05:16:40 PM PST

    •  cost of living. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Creosote

      people need drama to act. Climate change is the very opposite to drama. it will come in little venomous drips of changing normality. Just look above here how people even here want to hear how high the water will be in 10 yrs. What would that be - 3 centimeters - nothing. Yet, it is going to rise from now on until beyond the seventh generation - it wont stop at a meter or at five, and eventually people will move, and will have to rebuild all the infrastructure.

      that will then tie down capital that they cant use otherwise.

      similarly - climate change doesnt work in "this storm" or "that flood". It will work in drip by drip decreasing output of the agriculture - and therefore, cent by cent increased food prices - until suddenly people are poor for food, and undernourished, where no such thing was dreamt of a generation ago.

      So climate change will work through a little by little deterioration in living conditions. household bills will rise. standard of living will decrease. Because less consumption can be paid for, less jobs will be sustainable. Meaning more poverty.

      Poor people wont rail at the sun (as they dont do today too) they will claim support. They will claim simple living support in favor above infrastructure investments to prepare for worse times, so  the next times will be that much worse.

      it willbe simply a gradual, slow, then faster decrease, step by step down to less wealth, less patience, less civilisation, encroachment of the urgency of existential needs upon everyday life, bit by bit. Then, people will turn against each other, since there must be some culprit for the then obvious deterioration.

      Then it will become rough.

       

    •  On the contrary (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean

      We need to encourage gay marriage and abortions precisely because they contribute to a happier society with fewer births. Fewer births is a key requirement, insufficient in itself, but utterly necessary to species survival without a near-term population collapse.

  •  I am afraid (0+ / 0-)

    the stakes are high enough for nuclear. Germany was able to cut its coal-burning out, but then regressed due to public outcry after Fukushima. They are back to using coal as the energy "bridge" until they can go totally renewable. It was a bad deal for global warming.

Meteor Blades, skybluewater, Sylv, copymark, Gooserock, Danno11, wytcld, Shockwave, Wintermute, cotterperson, eeff, willyr, RFK Lives, Creosote, ask, oceanview, kharma, Eric Blair, emmasnacker, White Buffalo, kj in missouri, defluxion10, wordwraith, Bluebirder, ybruti, Steven D, marina, NoMoreLies, LakeSuperior, blueyedace2, YucatanMan, Laurence Lewis, reflectionsv37, Burned, Ice Blue, blue jersey mom, the fan man, Nowhere Man, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, tonyahky, cookseytalbott, Lefty Coaster, blueoasis, Ashaman, doinaheckuvanutjob, Dianna, WarrenS, MadMs, One Pissed Off Liberal, BeninSC, pfiore8, ColoTim, Margfh, FishOutofWater, Mary Mike, Richard Lyon, bnasley, SeaTurtle, bobswern, Don midwest, Assaf, amyzex, limpidglass, elwior, Buckeye Nut Schell, KJG52, jamess, monkeybrainpolitics, Calamity Jean, petulans, maggiejean, soarbird, nchristine, don mikulecky, rbird, Dragon5616, citisven, Leftcandid, Just Bob, rb137, Mokurai, LaughingPlanet, NJpeach, marsanges, Polly Syllabic, sunny skies, renzo capetti, cordgrass, samanthab, Lady Libertine, cai, nirbama, DrTerwilliker, cocinero, newusername, Pakalolo, slowbutsure, Seitanist, Teiresias70, marleycat, Grandma Susie, enhydra lutris, peregrine kate, Democrats Ramshield, this is only a test, Sunspots, jadt65, Auriandra, PrometheusUnbound, No one gets out alive, Laurel in CA, IowaBiologist, anodnhajo, cwsmoke, IndieGuy, 2thanks, CA ridebalanced, Horace Boothroyd III, wxorknot, Glen The Plumber, James Wells, Heavy Mettle, Lily O Lady, jusjtim35, jbob, Dan Schapiro, northerntier, nice marmot, roundhead, gnosticator

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site