Scientists repair damage to ozone layer

[Saigon]

the skeptical side is just as strongly in favour of environmental stewardship as the alarmists

And yet on these threads we have seen people in the past week ridicule the cost of droughts on the economy, and scoff at the concept of glacial melt, which is already creating a food crisis in some parts of the world.

Crusader Frank was laughing himself silly the other day over the idea that a change in climate could push up food prices.

Many posters here, at least, will not blink until something happens to their back garden. Then they will scream to high heaven.

 

[Saigon]

You waited 2 MINUTES in the middle of the night and declared victory? REALLY?

No, I waited until both Frank and Dave posted their usual "I surrender" posts.

This is an "I surrender" post:

They launched an 2,000 mile long pair of Gargoyle sunglasses into a blocking position between Earth and that Big yellow Thing in the Sky

 

[IanC]

the skeptical side is just as strongly in favour of environmental stewardship as the alarmists

And yet on these threads we have seen people in the past week ridicule the cost of droughts on the economy, and scoff at the concept of glacial melt, which is already creating a food crisis in some parts of the world.

Crusader Frank was laughing himself silly the other day over the idea that a change in climate could push up food prices.

Many posters here, at least, will not blink until something happens to their back garden. Then they will scream to high heaven.

there have always been droughts, floods and famines. we scoff at the idea that you think they are caused by CO2. how much pain and suffering have been caused by the use of biofuels and extra cost of energy in poor countries?

 

[Saigon]

how much pain and suffering have been caused by the use of biofuels and extra cost of energy in poor countries?

Very, very little. In the past year I have been to several of the poorest countries on the planet, and I've never seen biofuel mentioned. Gas prices are what they are, but the only impact of biofuel you see in the Third World is deforestation in Borneo.

Do you really think Burundians use biofuel? Thee are people who often use car batteries for electricity in their home.

there have always been droughts, floods and famines.

Yes, of course there have.

But the cycles of each are becoming shorter and more intense.

I posted a few days ago that Australia recently had something like 14 droughts in 20 years. In the 1950s they had one.

Saying 'there have always been floods' completely ignores the evidence of how often floods occur, and how severe they are.

 

[IanC]

how much pain and suffering have been caused by the use of biofuels and extra cost of energy in poor countries?

Very, very little. In the past year I have been to several of the poorest countries on the planet, and I've never seen biofuel mentioned. Gas prices are what they are, but the only impact of biofuel you see in the Third World is deforestation in Borneo.

Do you really think Burundians use biofuel? Thee are people who often use car batteries for electricity in their home.

there have always been droughts, floods and famines.

Yes, of course there have.

But the cycles of each are becoming shorter and more intense.

I posted a few days ago that Australia recently had something like 14 droughts in 20 years. In the 1950s they had one.

Saying 'there have always been floods' completely ignores the evidence of how often floods occur, and how severe they are.

do you really think that the demand for corn to make ethanol has no impact on the price of corn? and that the price of corn makes no impact on the price of food throughout the world? again, do you really think that carbon tax has no impact on the price of energy, with reverberations around the world?

I dont know where you are getting your information on droughts, floods and storms but I think it must be slanted. you brought up Australia. just recently they were struck by the unintended consequences of fear due to the exaggerated and unsubtantiated pronouncements of the CAGW alarmists. they were so worried about the claim of permanent drought that they refused to spill water out of a dam that could have spared them most of the damage from an imminent flood.

 

[Unkotare]

how much pain and suffering have been caused by the use of biofuels and extra cost of energy in poor countries?

Very, very little. In the past year I have been to several of the poorest countries on the planet

Wow, does that make you "elite"?

 

[Saigon]

do you really think that the demand for corn to make ethanol has no impact on the price of corn? and that the price of corn makes no impact on the price of food throughout the world? again, do you really think that carbon tax has no impact on the price of energy, with reverberations around the world?

I dont know where you are getting your information on droughts, floods and storms but I think it must be slanted. you brought up Australia. just recently they were struck by the unintended consequences of fear due to the exaggerated and unsubtantiated pronouncements of the CAGW alarmists. they were so worried about the claim of permanent drought that they refused to spill water out of a dam that could have spared them most of the damage from an imminent flood.

From corn? Basically no impact at all. That is a US issue. Most biofuel is produced from palm oil, and the issue there is destruction of rainforests.

These issue simply are not on the radar in countries like Burundi.

I get my information on Australia when I am in Australia. Which I quite regularly...I'll be there again in December, though only in Sydney. I also read SMH quite regularly.

These are the recent drought years in Australia:

2009
2008
2007
2006
2003
2000
1995
1994
1991

Drought in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Suffice to say, these trends are quite different from those recorded earlier in the 20th century. The droughts come more often, and are more intense. The same pattern is also being experienced in Mexico, Spain and the US.

 

[IanC]

rainfall in Australia

sorry, this is the best I could quickly find for droughts. looks like they were worse in the past but it doesnt have the 2000's

sorry, couldnt find a country-wide flood graph. here is one for Brisbane. it doesnt appear that floods are getting worse either

like I said-- just because someone is willing to tell you that floods, droughts and weather are more extreme that doesnt mean it is true. again, I am more than willing to read your counter evidence. preferably not another wiki page though

 

[Saigon]

here is one for Brisbane. it doesnt appear that floods are getting worse either

And yet the 2010 floods were the worst in 25 years, possibly the worst ever.

A series of floods hit Australia, beginning in December 2010, primarily in the state of Queensland including its capital city, Brisbane. The floods forced the evacuation of thousands of people from towns and cities.[2] At least 70 towns and over 200,000 people were affected.[2] Damage initially was estimated at around A$1 billion.[3] The estimated reduction in Australia's GDP is about A$30 billion.[1]

The 2010–2011 floods killed 35 people in Queensland.[5] As of 26 January, an additional nine people were missing.[6] The state's coal industry was particularly hard hit. The Queensland floods were followed by the 2011 Victorian floods which saw more than fifty communities in western and central Victoria also grapple with significant flooding.

2010

btw, Rainfall for Australia as a while may well be rising because of the increasing frequency and intensity of tropical storms and cyclones. This does not mean the frequency of droughts is not also increasing - it is. Just in different states. QLD gets the cyclones; WA, NT and NSW get the droughts.

 

[Saigon]

Incidentally, of the 25 worst floods to hit Australia in the past century, fully 11 have occured within the last 10 years.

 

[Old Rocks]

the skeptical side is just as strongly in favour of environmental stewardship as the alarmists

And yet on these threads we have seen people in the past week ridicule the cost of droughts on the economy, and scoff at the concept of glacial melt, which is already creating a food crisis in some parts of the world.

Crusader Frank was laughing himself silly the other day over the idea that a change in climate could push up food prices.

Many posters here, at least, will not blink until something happens to their back garden. Then they will scream to high heaven.

there have always been droughts, floods and famines. we scoff at the idea that you think they are caused by CO2. how much pain and suffering have been caused by the use of biofuels and extra cost of energy in poor countries?

The pain of the cost of energy for all of us will increase as the price of fossil fuel is driven up by demand. And the cheap oil is already almost gone. The wise will use the existing technology to create their own energy at home. The unwise will suffer.

The cost of food is going up because of massive crop losses in the last three years because of floods, droughts, and fires. In the rich nations, this is an inconveniance, for the present, and just leaves less many for the material things we desire. In the poor nations, this means people starve.

Yes, there have always been droughts and floods. But not at the present rate of occurance. Both of the largest reinsurance companies in the world state that the rate of extreme weather events is three to fives times what it was 40 years ago.

 

[Old Rocks]

how much pain and suffering have been caused by the use of biofuels and extra cost of energy in poor countries?

Very, very little. In the past year I have been to several of the poorest countries on the planet, and I've never seen biofuel mentioned. Gas prices are what they are, but the only impact of biofuel you see in the Third World is deforestation in Borneo.

Do you really think Burundians use biofuel? Thee are people who often use car batteries for electricity in their home.

there have always been droughts, floods and famines.

Yes, of course there have.

But the cycles of each are becoming shorter and more intense.

I posted a few days ago that Australia recently had something like 14 droughts in 20 years. In the 1950s they had one.

Saying 'there have always been floods' completely ignores the evidence of how often floods occur, and how severe they are.

do you really think that the demand for corn to make ethanol has no impact on the price of corn? and that the price of corn makes no impact on the price of food throughout the world? again, do you really think that carbon tax has no impact on the price of energy, with reverberations around the world?

I dont know where you are getting your information on droughts, floods and storms but I think it must be slanted. you brought up Australia. just recently they were struck by the unintended consequences of fear due to the exaggerated and unsubtantiated pronouncements of the CAGW alarmists. they were so worried about the claim of permanent drought that they refused to spill water out of a dam that could have spared them most of the damage from an imminent flood.

A thirteen per cent loss in our corn crop, as well as a much lower quality of what was harvested, has a huge impact.

A twelve per cent loss of the soy bean crop, again with lower quality in what was harvested.


Climate Change Adaptation: A Case for Preventative Action and Risk Transfer | World Resources Report


Senior Climate Change Advisor, Swiss Re


Global efforts to address climate change have been in disarray following the failed talks in Copenhagen. But even if all carbon emissions were stopped at once, climate trends would continue to expose local populations to the mounting challenges - and costs - of protecting greater asset values against weather-related risks. These range from more frequent and severe storms, floods, droughts and other natural disasters to sea level rise, crop failures, and water shortages. Innovative insurance solutions involving partners from the public and private sectors offer local decision-makers cost-effective ways to secure funding before a disaster strikes and make their communities more resourceful when it does.

Adapting to the unavoidable impacts of climate change

Economic losses from climate change are already substantial and on the rise. Over half of the world’s population is presently threatened by natural hazards, and insured losses from weather-related disasters have jumped from USD 5.1 billion (GBP 3.4 billion) per year in the period between 1970 and 1989 to USD 27 billion (GBP 17.7 billion) annually over the last two decades[1]. In Europe alone, losses from surge events along the North Sea coast are expected to more than quadruple from an annual average of EUR 600 million (GBP 530 billion) to EUR 2.6 billion (GBP 2.3 billion) towards the end of this century[2]. But the most vulnerable and least prepared regions are in the developing world. Climate risks could cost emerging economies up to 19 percent of their total gross domestic product by 2030, predicts the Economics of Climate Adaptation (ECA) working group in its 2009 study “Shaping Climate-Resilient Development.”[3]

A case for preventive action and risk transfer

“some two-thirds of expected losses from climate change can be averted using cost-effective adaptation measures.”These are gloomy projections. But the ECA findings tell another, more upbeat story. The encouraging part is that case studies in eight different regions of the globe, ranging from Maharashtra in India to Florida and Northern England, showed that some two-thirds of expected losses from climate change can be averted using cost-effective adaptation measures. These include improved drainage and irrigation systems, sea defences and enhanced building codes, vegetation buffers and disaster awareness campaigns, among many others. The ready availability and proven value of such measures make a compelling case for preventive action

 

[Sallow]

At last - a good news story on the environment!

Thanks to the ban on CFCs in aerosols - which I imagine many posters here ridiculed and opposed - the hole in ozone layer is getting smaller. By 2050, the hole should be gone altogether.


A University of Canterbury atmospheric researcher this week revealed that New Zealand's ozone hole - responsible for a 14 per cent jump in melanoma over the past decade - is shrinking for the first time in 30 years.

"Ozone levels above Antarctica are projected to return to 1980 levels - previous to the ozone hole - after 2050," said Dr Adrian McDonald.

NZ scientists' role in CFC ban profound, says environmental body - National - NZ Herald News

A funny thing happens when science is used instead of religion to deal with issues.

Problems get solved.

 

[Old Rocks]

Yep. And odd how the mantra of man is just too small to affect a change in the Earth's atmosphere stands up when compared to geological history. Seems that the single biggest effect on the atmosphere of the earth was done by tiny blue-green algea.

 

[Saigon]

A funny thing happens when science is used instead of religion to deal with issues.

Problems get solved.

My thoughts exactly!

I was delighted to read this, because it shows that not only can science read changes in the environment, it can also help create solutions. Given the political will, of course.

 

[daveman]

Dave, Frank -

I see you have conceded the debate.

I see you're delusional.

 

[daveman]

A funny thing happens when science is used instead of religion to deal with issues.

Problems get solved.

My thoughts exactly!

I was delighted to read this, because it shows that not only can science read changes in the environment, it can also help create solutions. Given the political will, of course.

Here's a solution:

A year ago former vice president Al Gore threw down a gauntlet: to repower America with 100 percent carbon-free electricity within 10 years. As the two of us started to evaluate the feasibility of such a change, we took on an even larger challenge: to determine how 100 percent of the world’s energy, for all purposes, could be supplied by wind, water and solar resources, by as early as 2030. Our plan is presented here.

--

Overall construction cost for a WWS system might be on the order of $100 trillion worldwide, over 20 years, not including transmission.​

$100 trillion. No problem. Just tax the rich, right?

 

[Saigon]

Daveman -

The topic is the ozone layer.

 

[daveman]

Daveman -

The topic is the ozone layer.

The topic is fixing what man has allegedly caused.

 

[flacaltenn]

here is one for Brisbane. it doesnt appear that floods are getting worse either

And yet the 2010 floods were the worst in 25 years, possibly the worst ever.

A series of floods hit Australia, beginning in December 2010, primarily in the state of Queensland including its capital city, Brisbane. The floods forced the evacuation of thousands of people from towns and cities.[2] At least 70 towns and over 200,000 people were affected.[2] Damage initially was estimated at around A$1 billion.[3] The estimated reduction in Australia's GDP is about A$30 billion.[1]

The 2010–2011 floods killed 35 people in Queensland.[5] As of 26 January, an additional nine people were missing.[6] The state's coal industry was particularly hard hit. The Queensland floods were followed by the 2011 Victorian floods which saw more than fifty communities in western and central Victoria also grapple with significant flooding.

2010

btw, Rainfall for Australia as a while may well be rising because of the increasing frequency and intensity of tropical storms and cyclones. This does not mean the frequency of droughts is not also increasing - it is. Just in different states. QLD gets the cyclones; WA, NT and NSW get the droughts.

Hey Saigon --- Please PM me when you plan on conceeding defeat in the Australian weather debate.. I want to be here... Can you READ the graphs that Ian posted? Do you understand the implications of the assertions you're making?

You should stick with the ozone hole -- you might win a prize for that one...