ruminations
We need more hurricane damage
Tue, September 27, 2005 - 12:55 PMHumans are the cause of this threat, but humans won't do anything about it until the changes are so great that the existing infrastructure supporting human habitation is also unable to cope with the change.
Up until now the US business lobby has been squarely against the Kyoto accords because it will cost them $$$ to comply. That is starting to change - the insurance industry is worried that if research linking increased ocean temperature to increased storm intensity and increased CO2 levels to increased warming are correct that their industry could be facing bankruptcy as the inevitable ever larger storms take their toll.
Humans won't do anything about global warming until the costs of doing nothing are outweighed by the costs of adapting infrastructure to climate change. Only then will the business lobby join the environmental lobby - when their bottom line is affected.
That is when the ecosystem will get its breather.
So, I'm rooting for more hurricane damage.
thanks,
~ stainless
Tue, September 27, 2005 - 12:55 PM -
permalink -
14 Comments
14 Comments |
add a comment |
|
Unsu...
|
Tue, September 27, 2005 - 1:07 PM
We can help NOW
We all choose to create reality everyday, in everyway, with everything we say.
I choose to believe that each and every one of us has the ability to affect change. I choose to believe that each and every one of us can create the reality we live in by saying AND DOING the right thing for the world around us. Styrofoam in its creation and when it’s burned hurts the ozone layer which causes global warming… don’t use Styrofoam in ANY shape or form. Hummers and other gas guzzling cars spew the highest amounts of toxic gases into the environment… choose 2 drive more eco-friendly vehicles, or even consider changing fuels and convert your car 2 bio diesel or use fuel with ethanol mixed in when available. Carpool! Take the bus! Go 4 a surf instead of a cruse. I choose to believe that each and every individual on this plant has the ability to affect change~ and that if we all work together to be more gentle on the planet that we CAN make the world a better place NOW. |
|
Tue, September 27, 2005 - 4:42 PM
common myth
Red, I am not saying styrofoam is good, but there is the connection you assert between foam and global warming does not exist.
>>>> One of the most common mistakes that we have observed in discussions of climate and atmospheric change is confusion between the rather separate concepts of ozone depletion and global warming. This isn't necessarily surprising given the scant information that most people pick up from the media. However, for many years meteorologists have been fighting a rearguard action to persuade people that the globe isn't warming because there is more sun coming through the ozone hole. There are however important connections between the two issues that complicate potential actions that we might take to alleviate the different problems. This week, for instance, a new IPCC report was released that looked at the greenhouse warming potential of many of the replacement chemicals (HFCs and HCFCs) that were used to replace CFCs in aerosol cans and refrigeration units under the Montreal Protocol (and subsequent amendments). The connections actually go both ways: Firstly, CFCs, HFCs etc. are greenhouse gases, while ozone is both a greenhouse gas and an absorber of solar radiation (in the UV range), and so changes to their concentrations affect the radiation transfer through the atmosphere. Secondly, the chemistry that controls ozone loss is very sensitive to the local temperature and humidity, and as that is affected by climate change, that will impact ozone depletion as well. The original CFCs were powerful greenhouse gases (about 0.34 W/m2 forcing since 1850), and even allowing for a cooling due to the subsequent depletion in stratospheric ozone (-0.15 W/m2), they had a net warming effect. Therefore the ongoing phase-out will help both the stratospheric ozone problem and reduce the forcings leading to global warming. CFC concentrations are indeed now starting to level out and are expected to decrease further in coming decades. However, some of the replacement gases (for instance HFC-23) which are not as harmful to ozone, nonetheless have an significant greenhouse warming potential. The total forcing from these replacements is expected to be small compared to increases in CO2, but any reductions that can be easily made can potentially offset some increases in CO2. Thankfully, some other replacements exist (for instance ammonia) which neither affect ozone nor the greenhouse effect. The cure for ozone depletion has not turned out to be worse than the disease! On the other hand, some of the climate change effects on ozone were discussed previously in connection with Arctic ozone levels. These effects are both chemical and dynamical. The chemical impacts relate mainly to increasing levels of methane and stratospheric water vapour directly affecting the local chemistry. Additionally, stratospheric cooling (caused by increasing CO2 as well) has an indirect effect on the rates of many of the ozone-destroying reactions (accelerating ozone loss). Dynamically, planetary and gravity wave activity, (related to convection and the jet streams, for instance) all affect the momentum balance in the stratosphere and control the Brewer-Dobson overturning circulation. Therefore changes to those can potentially affect the stratospheric circulation and thus change stratospheric winds and stability. These dynamic effects can often lead to local changes of temperature (particularly in high latitudes) much greater than any radiative change e.g through possibly changes to the strength of the polar vortex (Shindell et al, 1998). So, as we learn more about stratospheric ozone and climate change, what were once two separate problems have become more and more entwined. It therefore appears unlikely that meteorologists are going to get a break anytime soon from explaining exactly how the two issues do, and don't, connect. |
|
Tue, September 27, 2005 - 6:19 PM
Regardless...
Let's not overlook the point here by getting bogged down in details. Regardless of whether or not styrofoam in the environment is directly liked to ozone damage, the fact DOES exist that styrofoam has a very rapid use lifetime, and quickly after its production, becomes GARBAGE THAT DOESN'T GO AWAY. We cannot continue to produce non-biodegradable trash and think that we can still find nooks and crannies on the earth to tuck these things away. Plastic and styrofoam are STUPID investments. The earth functions by using its continual energy source (the sun) to turn over chemical products, one into the other. Air becomes plant matter becomes animal becomes food for the worms, etc. When our natural resources get transformed into plastic and styrofoam materials, it is like locking good viable energy away. It's like buying an RV ~ lots of fun for awhile, but never a good investment long term!
I get really pissed off when scientists pick apart the global warming issue by claiming that since we can't exactly pinpoint the cause, humans must not be responsible for it. It's not that we aren't to blame, we're just not yet smart enough to figure it out. The environment and atmosphere are extremely complex dynamical systems, and we don't fully have the scientific methods down to understand them. Whatever. What we can be doing is figuring out ways to lessen our impact by being clever (i.e. researching alternative energy, alternative biodegradeable materials) rather than burying our heads in the piles of scientific papers (of research financed by big business). And YAY! I agree with you Stainless. Yeah, it is really really shitty to lose your home in a natural disaster, but there are too many people on the earth, and as climate change starts to rear its ugly head, we are going to continue to see worse and worse environmental disasters occurring. I just hope I'm able to take a global perspective when my home gets flooded or buried in rubble when the big one hits CA. |
|
Tue, September 27, 2005 - 8:26 PM
Some thought's just to ponder
I'm working on a huge project for work right now so cant write much.
But wanted you all to think about the 55,000 year cycle and the millions of year's of our environmental evolution and its changes. Wait, I guess I want to first of all agree with a lot of what you all are saying. Also wanted to say isn't it wonderful to be involoved with a community that even cares to take our personal time to be discussing this. We could be driving home from the mall in our HUGE Hummer to our six thousand square foot home that just one or two of us live's in and not caring about any of this. Many blessings to all of you.......... So, here is some things for you all to ponder and think about. Yoesimite was (factual) a desert at one time. The Playa was a wonderful forest with a lake, (obviously) with Pines and scrub Oak along with spring wild flowers similar to the definition of a mid mountain range. The range that would have started from the marsh's/wetlands and rise and be the middle elevation to where the pines, spruce etc. would start and begin high forest. This happened about 3 million years ago (dont quote me on that as its been awhile since college). Think about how global warming was created then because all of these changes were proven by the rise of temperature's on our planet. Also, start to read about the Volcanoes that are really becoming active under the Antarctic. When and not if they surface, it will change our whole planet. Luckily, for all of us, our kids and Grand kids will be at the 3033 Burning Man before this happen's......... So, what I'm saying is yes lets continue and FIGHT to be smarter, cleaner, use smart materials etc. But also know, understand and appreciate Mother Earth. She has a plan and we will never ever be able to stop her or control her. Our goals should be to teach people understanding and respect (which I think all of your writings support and agree on). However, while I'm sick and almost ready to check out of this horrific and sad world we live in with overconcumption, huge cars greed etc.. I do believe that some of global warming is a natural occurence that we can do nothing about. One more negative thought. Please check into Greenpeace's website. japan (sorry, I dont believe it deserve's a capital J right now) has just made it illegal to start Whaling again. So far the realistic guess that just in a short time four hundred Whales have been killed. Anyways, I must go. I do have lots of great facts and news about new flora species being found. I also have quite a bit of scientific facts that support that populations of certain species of animal life are reaching higher levels than in the last 200 years. I know that could be another whole debate, but I like to hold onto some positive idea's and concepts........... Much love to you all and may we help humanity be able to have the understanding that we do. We, not knowing everything, yet, yearning to and being open and wanting CHANGE........ I guess the one thing that is certain is change is upon us and must be NOW. Lets all get a bunch of burners who think like us to buy a huge island somewhere and live under Playa rules (however, dont sell out like BM LLC did when we are ready to retire and ask the Discovery Channel to come and film us for enormous "un-disclosed amounts of money). Red Gazelle and Amaya can be in charge of social life for us all (fuck, that will be a busy schedule!!!!!), I can grow all of our veggies and be in charge of water and get my Dad to put all of his thousands of solar panels there for power. Derek can build a real true Temple that we can all meditate in. Mara can learn to fish from me and do her "foot stuff" (JK) and amazing work. And all my new friends on my list can add there beauty and there talents.......... How fab would that be, and NO FUCKIN' dust storms or need for baby wipes!!!!!! Must go, Danny |
|
Tue, September 27, 2005 - 10:10 PM
interesting
I always find it interesting to think about the fact that the earth, if it were conscious wouldnt probably care one way or the other about all this stuff. Would the earth care if it had a bunch of the chemicals that made styrofoam laying around vs styrofoam? Would the earth care if metal were made into cars or oil into gas? Probably not. The funny thing is, even if we dumped all our nukes off, the earth would be in relative terms getting a 2nd degree burn in a few places, its overall mass would be largely unaffected as would what its made out of. Arguably the earth wouldnt give a rats ass either way and would see it largely as a skin irritation issue.
So mostly when we are talking about enviromental issues we are talking about what we want to keep, for us humans and the animals we humans want to save. Cuz the earth has seen all kinds of things including 95% of all species going extinct (if I remember right) getting hit by the moon and reshaping itself, not too mention the meteor strike that formed the gulf of mexico and probably killed the dinasaurs as well as going from a methane atmosphere to a nitrogen / oxygen atmosphere. I recently saw a report that said we could build a 35 square mile land fill and it would hold all of the united states garbage for the next 1000 years. If that is correct information then that brings into question the whole idea that we are causing any real issue by making plastic objects for example. I still say there is a lot of science that needs done and that the enviromental movement both those for (earth first, green peace, etc) and those against (call that corporate america, republicans) are using far too much propoganda to believe either one of their view points. The truth lies in the middle somewhere. |
|
Wed, September 28, 2005 - 1:23 AM
wheeeww
What a bunch of long winded smarty pants. I want to read it all but I have to go watch some cartoons before my brain rots.
I'll do it i promise. I'll also do more research on permaculture design and try to apply it to my business and personal lives. Also researching biodiesel and othe ralternative fuels. If we could only harness the windbaggedness of our friend naSTU... |
|
Wed, September 28, 2005 - 8:40 AM
Doing my part...
Yeah Henry, I hear ya!
In fact, I'm going to switch back to ozone-depleting hairspray today! And maybe I can invent some eco-unfriendly disposable things, like styrofoam underwear. |
|
Unsu...
|
Wed, September 28, 2005 - 8:41 AM
C.Y.R. Baby
My main point is that WE create the world by how we perceive it.
We create the world around us, the relationships, the jobs, our neighbors, by what we think of them, say about them and how we interact with them. If you want something to happen~ go for it~ take charge~ CHANGE THE PERCEPTION. If there is a policy that you would like enacted or changed in the government or anywhere… go tell them you want it to happen. Show them how you want the change to take place. If there is something that you can do, CREATE THE REALITY and do it! Don’t just sit back and let the ride take you… DRIVE THE CAR! MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE. This is your chance. CFCs are very stable in the troposphere. They move to the Stratosphere and are broken down by strong ultraviolet light, where they release chlorine atoms that then deplete the ozone layer. CFCs are commonly used as refrigerants, solvents, and FOAM BLOWING agents. www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/foams/qa.html (that would be STYROFOAM~ sure, there are regulations to make it “better” but what is better when we’re talking about pure evil? Hmmm…) Methyl Bromide is a chemical being phased out in the US that is used to grow strawberries and other veggies. It is used to sterilize the ground. They will be using this in foreign countries even after we stop in the US. Because non-organic fruits and veggies are entering our country from other countries, we should be aware of its use. The application of Methyl Bromide depletes the ozone layer. Buy organic fruit and veggies because it is good for you, and the world. And while we’re at it, let’s stop using aerosol cans that aren’t labeled as being safe for the environment. That would be hairspray, bug spray, cleaning sprays… EVERYDAY IN EVERY WAY I CHOOSE 2 CREATE THE REALITY THAT I HAVE CONTROL OVER MY WORLD>>> I EFFECT MY REALITY WITH THE THINGS I SAY AND DO. I love the world. I want the world to be a beautiful place now and 100’s of years from now. I love you, and I want this world to be beautiful for you… which is why I choose to live in a state of constant respect and humility for the world around us. I am here creating a safe, healthy, beautiful world. And so it is. (PS>>> Danny, I love U soooo much. I can't wait to buy that island with you... and I'll be more then happy to help with growing the veggies.) |
|
Wed, September 28, 2005 - 11:17 AM
be clear
Amaya, if one is less than accurate when one is trying to make a case for a cause one hurts the cause by opening up the argument for the cause to viable criticism. Taking a brief moment to check facts/connections/arguments can only help. Blindly repeating hype opens the door for the types of criticism in sciences and media that you are complaining about.
|
|
Wed, September 28, 2005 - 1:09 PM
Stuart, I'm not arguing with the facts you are citing. Actually, I REALLY appreciated the fact that you actually CITED them, with references, unlike most other posters (like me, I acquiesce, but the things I was citing are pretty much general scientific knowledge). What I'm complaining about is that by trying to refute the claims that global warming is caused by styrofoam production, we might get bogged down in the details, i.e. lose sight of the big picture that the presence of humans, living in the particular consumerist way that our culture does, is leading to irreversable damage to things in the environment that we dearly care about. Styrofoam's not good for the earth no matter how you look at it.
And I'm not saying that the earth isn't going to survive when the pestilent blight of man is gone, I'm saying that we can perhaps salvage a lot of what's great (i.e. what HUMANS care about, like pandas and whales and trees) by making changes now. I'm saying that we can do a lot by focusing on being constructive (i.e. researching alternative energy and sustainable practices, living as an example to others), rather than destructive (i.e. claiming that styrofoam isn't bad based on reports that there is no direct link between its production and climate change, and telling people who care about what's happening to their planet to shut up and stop believing the hype). I think Storm is right that the answer lies somewhere in the middle, but that is a stance that's a bit more passive than I'd like to take. I actually believe that by trying to be conscientious about my living practices, encouraging friends who are interested in researching sustainability, etc. telling people about what I know about environmental science and ecology, can maybe make a difference in the way things are headed. I think what I was reacting to the most in your commentary is that it reminds me of what happens when politicians get their hands on scientific reports that they don't fully understand the ramifications of, and use them to argue that global warming is a farce, therefore, we shouldn't worry about climate change because it's not our fault. When in reality the research just showed that minute detail A was not directly correlated with minute detail B, which really doesn't prove much of anything at all. The really scary thing is that most policiticans don't understand science, and unfortunately, they have the power to make the decisions that shape the direction of our country. I mean, come on! Our president believes in intelligent design. Whatever. |
|
Wed, September 28, 2005 - 1:26 PM
I'm usually a size 7, but hm...I don't know...does styrofoam shrink? I probably shouldn't put it in the dryer, huh. What about dry cleaning?
|
|
Wed, September 28, 2005 - 4:36 PM
God is American
I mean, come on! Our president believes in intelligent design. Whatever.
>> unfortuneatly so do most Americans... So he is representative. Sad but true. |
|
Wed, September 28, 2005 - 4:42 PM
I think Storm is right that the answer lies somewhere in the middle, but that is a stance that's a bit more passive than I'd like to take.
>> before you pigeon hole me as a passive, consider that sometimes taking actions based on the wrong information can do more damage to your cause in the end, then doing nothing or waiting for more data and then taking a clear course of action. However I freely admit to being overwelmed by information on many of these issues and unable to pick a side. The problem is I have seen each side caught in too many lies. |