UN: Climate doom at hand

Via New Daily:

Global warming is already eroding Earth’s ecosystem in ways that will release misery on a global scale if it is not mitigated soon, a landmark UN report has revealed.

The past five years were the hottest since global temperature records began, the report – compiled by the world’s leading scientists for the United Nations Climate Action Summit – revealed.

It comes as Australia’s Energy Minister Angus Taylor has shrugged off climate rally concerns, saying the country is on track to deliver its 2020 target.

The report stressed the need for immediate action to rein in out-of-control emissions, noting that the average global surface temperature for the past five years has been 1.1 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial baseline levels.

For context, the Paris Agreement’s goal is to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Not only are we experiencing unprecedented levels of warming, but our oceans have risen at an accelerated pace and the world’s glaciers have melted more quickly in the same period than any time on record.

“Overall, the amount of ice lost annually from the Antarctic ice sheet increased at least six-fold between 1979 and 2017,” it reads.

“The observed rate of global mean sea-level rise accelerated from 3.04 millimetres per year during the period 1997 to 2006 to approximately 4 millimetres per year during the period 2007 to 2016.”

The report concluded that across the globe, countries and communities must overhaul how they produce, distribute and consume almost everything to avoid the worsening environmental and economic disaster.

It called on governments to urgently heed these warnings and act to significantly reduce their countries emissions.

Dr Pep Canadell, the executive director of the Global Carbon Project and a contributing author of the report, called the findings “sobering”.

“This new assessment is another sobering reminder of the critical state of the climate crisis and a call on governments, businesses and civic society to act more determinedly and aggressively in reducing greenhouse gases emissions,” he said.

“How many climate records does it take to accept the unprecedented nature of what we are living and to act upon it?”

The report names and shames Australia as being one of the world’s highest emitters per capita.

“The highest-per-capita emissions are found in the USA, Australia and top oil producers such as Saudi Arabia,” it reads.

“Despite extraordinary growth in renewable energy over the past decade, the global energy system is still dominated by fossil fuel sources.

“The annual increase in global energy use is greater than the increase in renewable energy, meaning fossil fuel use and CO² emissions continue to grow.”

Australia plays a large part in the global fossil fuel industry, being the world’s third-largest exporter and the largest among the OCED countries.

The doom chart:

Pass the doochie.

David Llewellyn-Smith
Latest posts by David Llewellyn-Smith (see all)

Comments

    • A clever one would buy up all the frozen lands in Siberia, Canada and Alaska, and sabotage the climate summits.

    • I think more money can be made by relocating 1-2 billion people

      Imagine all the housing, infrastructure, commercial property, furniture, transport, ….
      Global warming can be better for GDP growth than a world war or series of huge earthquakes

    • Well, as a Fossil Fuel Baron, you would pay ‘people’ like Robert to spread doubt about the science.

  1. Wow, I could have sworn the world was older than 80 years. Can you explain how our stone age ancestors survived the 3deg C warmer than now period called the infamous holocene climate optimum. Obviously our colapsing global population shows just how terrible the climate doom crisis is getting. As is the obesity epidemic demonstrating the colapse of or food production due to all this warmth and CO2 making plants grow faster.

      • Don’t you know anything ? Stone age man was totally reliant on high intensity industrial farming and global supply chains.

    • The world population was about 2 million back then, they moved in response to shifts. Lets see 500 million people move out of the river deltas around the Ganges, Indus, Niger, Nile etc. That should work out well. Australia as one of the most destructive carbon polluters per capita will face massive pressure to take in displaced populations, think of the vibrancy.

    • It also changed over hundreds of thousands of years, not 150….. the problem is the speed of this change ensures that no gradual adaption is possible….

          • HadronCollisionMEMBER

            Paging Researchtime

            I’d love to do this with you Robert but…oh wait, no I wouldn’t
            I’d rather punch myself in the face with a sock full of rotten camembert

          • Yes i understand you are incapable of questioning you own assumptions. Climate scientists are gods, and are thus infallible after all. Its morally wrong to pose inconvenient questions like why they ignore thermodynamic principles such as the equilibrium law.

          • All Scientists believe in the scientific method, Which essentially is to question what your told is true and to research and provide counter proof. If they dont believe in it then they are not a scientist. Scientists question the results of other peoples experiments and apply controlled skepticism, but this does not mean that the results are wrong.

            Scientists spend a long time learning the rigors of this methodology and focus on the area of expertise they are most interested in.

            To claim as a geologist that climate science analysis is wrong because “I know rocks” is a valuable as a priest claiming climate science is wrong because “I know how to manipulate people by quoting the appropriate versus from an old book”.

            Maybe you could get involved and explain to them the issue of how they ignore the law of equilibrium. If your right then they should change their position, but if your not you might learn something too.

          • don’t engage… don’t engage… ah stuff it here I go, diving in with the unwashed masses.

            Robert – the difference between the previous epochs and now is the combustion engine and antibiotics

            Humanity can now clear massive tracts of land, build millions of kilometres of heat absorbing roads and survive infections that previously would have culled millions of people and reduced the population load on the planet.

            Everything from your toaster, to your air conditioner emits heat and this along with every other electrical device is why the globe is warming so fast compared to your eon’s old example.

            This is why its happening so fast. Ancient man didn’t have a toaster.

            (all sarcasm is fully intended.)

          • Climate science cannot be questioned […]

            You would struggle to find a field of scientific endeavour in history that has withstood more “questioning” than climate science.

            And *still* the best deniers can come up with is slight variations on long-debunked ideas, and god-of-the-gaps type arguments.

      • You really think the lake toba eruption that nearly wiped out humanity was a slow change? How about the 7dec warming in the space of decades during the younger dryas 11kya. How about you aquaint yourself with the gisp2 data.

        • “You really think the lake toba eruption that nearly wiped out humanity was a slow change? How about the 7dec warming in the space of decades during the younger dryas 11kya, How about you aquaint yourself with the gisp2 data.”

          Sure, aware of the Lake Toba eruption as an example of rapid change but thanks for pointing out that your aware that rapid changes tend to wipe out humanity….

          Lake Toba Was actually 74kya, not 11 and as such not relation to the Younger Dryas period…. Maybe your recollection of information from the Gisp2 dataset is not as well rounded as you believe.

        • Robert, if these truths are so obvious why don’t you think some Nobel winning scientist or economist calls out the same so called “obvious’ truths you’re pointing out.

          Scientists aren’t idiots, if theres any truth to what you’ve called out this whole conspiracy/magical as fairies climate change theory would fall flat on its face. Just as the entire world once believed the world was Flat as a pancake, science and the world moved on and disproved this.

          What’s more plausible is that you are a funded mouthpiece trying to deny the massive impacts of fossil fuel based growth just as the tobacco, sugar and other highly profitable but extremely damaging industries are funding highly questionable pro sugar, pro tobacco “no impact to health” studies.

    • Increased plant growth due to higher CO2 is likely offset by increased photorespiration at higher temperatures, meaning Photosynthesis is non-productive due to reactions that compete with CO2 assimilation.

    • The Horrible Scott Morrison MP

      You are correct Sir. The planet’s average surface temperature has risen by only 0.9 degrees Celsius since the 1800s, at a time when the alleged cause, CO2, has increased exponentially. This is scientific proof that the fallacy of man made climate change is a HOAX concocted by Satan to deny the existence of God. Oh wait, that’s the spinning ball Earth. And dinosaurs. And women drivers.

  2. Stewie GriffinMEMBER

    I will believe that there is a real climate emergency the moment the progressive left start wailing about immigration and that it should be stopped or reduced, as importing a bunch of 3rd worlders and raising them up to Western Levels of consumption is dooming us all the faster.

    Until then I view every environmental law impinging on our quality of life as an attack on Westerners designed to force us into accepting a lower quality of life simply so we can accept more immigrants.

    • HadronCollisionMEMBER

      I like your stuff but just because you don’t like the SJQ/Virtue Signalling doesn’t mean we should not pay attention/act.

      You don’t need a low QoL. I mean, installing water tanks, solar+storage, having access to a bug out kit, etc etc isn’t exactly slumming it

      • I suggest you read some lomborg then so you can aquaint yourself with how much of a con job it is. Or are you incapable of understanding cost to benefit ratios.

        • Do you mean the author of this?

          https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/climate-change-fear-wrong-policies-by-bjorn-lomborg-2019-08
          The Political Scientist ( WTF is that? )
          or the Professor of Business?

          He is not pointing out that Climate change is a Con job, he is just using the middle ground fallacy to undermine any progress he doesn’t think is warranted. e.g. ” Climate change is real but we shouldnt do anything that might impact our current standard of living because”…. to paraphrase.

          Read lost of his stuff, but while he may have a few points but he keeps using Logical Fallacies to justify his position instead of actual logical positions. For example to claim that the impact estimate of the IPCC would equate to only 2% drop of our standard of living and wouldn’t matter as we would be much better off then due to growth. Its a false to assert we are going to maintain growth at a consistent linear or even exponential rate. We may do, but as the pressures of volume and consumption kick in those rates are more likely to decline.

          I would also argue that the measure of 2% is problematic as it wont be the better off who feel that impact, it will be the poorer and that will only lead to more conflict and reduction in living standards for all.

          • Thats funny, So if I point out issues in his work I am a “warmist” and slandering him…. The only thing I said that was close to slander was the political scientist / professor of business…. and I only pointed that out as context for potential credibility of his analysis.

            Your so convinced your life as you know it will end if we decide to clean up our act that you will buy into any claim if conspiracy and use ad ho-minim against anyone who appears to not agree….

            I dont care if the “alarmists” are right or wrong as I can see a lot of progress towards a better life for everyone by moving down the path. As for people benefiting from the status quo vs change…. Those in control of Fossil Fuels and related industries have far more to lose individually and are throwing more resources at their side of the campaign…. I find the idea that the “alarmist” are part of a great conspiracy to profit from the AGW con ludicrous. The really crazy thing is those screaming this point are actually so caught up in their fear of a conspiracy that they cant see how they are arguing on the side of those whith the most to gain….

    • Sounds like the combination of a whole bunch of logical fallacies mixed up in there…

      1) The Slothful Induction Fallacy
      2) The Personal Incredulity Fallacy
      3) The “No True Scotsman” Fallacy

      Saving the planet from no matter what cause you think is putting it under threat is not a Left or Right wing ideology.

      In this case its pretty simple.
      1) If Global warming is real any effort we put in place is worth it to ensure our descendants have the best possible chances for a good life.
      2) If its not and we put the required effort in to improve things then we all win anyway.

      Based on those 2 simple propositions I think we need to ask ourselves why are we still arguing over the validity of the concept and who is benefiting from it?

      • HadronCollisionMEMBER

        PUT YOUR TIN FOIL HATS ON!

        Point of order. I don’t think it’s a concept but get your point

        Most people don’t get prudent risk management.

        Anyway. I wonder at what point will people like RObert be convinced? Maybe 1 Category 7 (new category) cyclone every few weeks in QLD? Maybe a consistent 50 degr temps in Melbs? Like, what would it take.

        • How about a theory that doesn’t violate the laws of thermodynamics. Or do you actually think 2+2=10 like the climate scientists. Thats the actual calculation by the way. They actually state that 3.7w/m2 of CO2 warming will cause between 10-14 watts of heating, by using a positive feedback mechanism that the observations prove is false and which violates the equilibrium law and thus the 2nd law. Then there is the matter of the additional 2w/m2 that is radiating to space when the earth was supposed to be trapping more heat. That is the signature of natural warming twice the size of CO2. So CO2 only causes 0.5deg C of warming based on actually observations.

      • The trouble is, it costs money – and lots of it.

        Thorium fuel cycle will “ensure our descendants have the best possible chances for a good life” and “improve things” so “we all win anyway”. Obviously, there hasn’t been a single commercial thorium reactor yet, so we will have to start building the necessary infrastructure from scratch. Ok, the next generation uranium reactors are already much safer and they will buy time for the construction of the thorium fuel cycle infrastructure, which in turn will buy time for nuclear fusion reactors….

        But then again, 99%+ are not interested in real solutions anyway, so don’t bother.

        • DS, the problem is that the rest of the 1% who do not care are still working out out how to maximise their profits from doing something about climate change issues.

          • China has been heavily investing in developing thorium fuel cycle infrastructure. So has India.

            Meanwhile, the West is finding new and ever inventive ways to screw things up. Not satisfied with just giving away the relevant thorium IPs to China and India, the West is hell-bent on undermining the existing uranium players. The West is doing this while accusing China of stealing IPs, of course.

        • The Dark Side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities some consider to be unnatural…..

          Remember, the ability to use logic and reason is insignificant next to the power of the Force. Feel, don’t think. Trust your instincts. And the Force will be with you.

    • Bringing in third world immigrants into western countries is a joke. As though the “breed like rabbits” belief systems in those countries won’t fill the void of those who have emigrated.

      • Freddy. I think it is Tones and Barnaby who want to encourage breeding like rabbits. The big B leads by example.

    • Climate change is real, there is no spin whatsoever in the argument of human made climate change.
      There is no conspiracy please take it seriously.
      All arguments against climate change are ridiculous the favourite being the one that humans only change the climate by 3%. This is spinning the facts as humans changing the climate by 3% is a catastrophe. If we changed it by 100% the Earth would be molten lava.
      The old mega rich people who send kids into wars just for more power just like gangsters you think they could care less about climate? They control the media & governments so we hear their voice the loudest. They purposely make fake news to discredit the real threat of climate change.
      The rich have plenty to lose to prevent climate change including the largest; USA’s currency is tied to oil, no oil = no USA!

    • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

      My point is, either we have a CLIMATE EMERGENCY in which case we should be doing EVERYTHING possible in order to mitigate and reduce the activity that is harming the environment, which in the West means reducing economic activity and the mass migration that is driving it OR we have a “climate emergency” that means ordinary people need to accept lower living standards so that our elites can continue minting coin through mass migration.

      Pretty simple really.

      Oh and btw, I agree that human activity is harming the environment, but I’ll be damned if I accept a lower quality of life simply so the Harry Triguboff, Frank Lowy and Gerry Harvey can eek out a few more years of massive profits by pursuing a defunct economic model.

      Everything else is virtue signalling by a bunch of ponces who’d rather be seen to be good environmental citizens than avoid making the hard decisions that would genuinely help the environment, rather than weaken the masses and further enrich our elites.

      • How would your life be lower quality? There are industries that need to change & forests that need to be saved and replanted. A gradual change from coal fire power to renewables in a smart way so having some fossil fuel backup in place during the transition. Less plastic junk from kids toys for example that last 30 days then need throwing to cheap crap from kmart that lasts 13 months then throw out. All we need to do is act, pretending to act like stopping shopping bags, fake recycle bins with a massive media behind it just exacerbates the problem.

        • Stewie GriffinMEMBER

          I accept that things need to be done – but if existing Australians crimp and save and sacrifice in order to improve Australia’s overall environmental impact…. using recycables, paying more for power, paying more for newer more energy efficient saving devices, etc…. and then our elites back fill every last environmental saving by importing more people, then Australians are accepting a lower quality of life, by way of lower disposable income and diversion of more of their income to higher cost but environmentally friendly solutions, for the sake of the environment in name only, while the reality is, they are accepting a lower quality of life in order to accommodate more immigrants.

          • You won’t get any arguments from me about the visas/ immigration rort on lower class Australia. Can’t even get the police to protect us they are so busy flooded with population growth.

            We as the public have to sacrifice say 5 percent of our lifestyle to combat climate change. Sharemarket aside, our miners may go backwards coal will go backwards.

    • It is harder and harder to come to any other conclusion. The rate of species collapse, especially insects, is especially worrying. Even if we find a way to make it through we can’t live in isolation from a fully functioning ecosystem. When looking at what can be done it is hard to see anything that can prevent masive changes from occurring. There isn’t the desire to change our way of living. We are like junkies who can rationalise the need to change yet are unable to. The technological fix is akin to having lottery as a retirement plan. It may work out yet it is a very big gamble and not likely to pay off. We’ve collectively stuffed the planet up in a very big way.

  3. clearly this fake attempt to reduce CO2 emission will not work
    time to start planning for relocation
    warming will make large areas (some densely populated) uninhabitable but it will also make wast areas that are currently underpopulated quite nice for living

    climate catastrophe is only human one not life one

    • what part is wrong?
      are you denying that the large areas inhabited by billions of people will go underwater due to sea level rise?

  4. We are going to drive “civilisation” into collapse.

    When a human gets a virus we often get a fever and the fever heats the body. This either kills off the virus or the kills the host.
    Looks like the earth is doing the same thing – trying to kill off a virus.

  5. David WilsonMEMBER

    What a load of unadulterated rubbish.
    The scientific facts tell the planet is cooling with 2016 being the warmest recent year and 2017 and 2018 were cooler , 2019 is also recorded as being cooler year to day as we are entering a cooling cycle .
    By the way CO2 has very little and almost no impact on temperatures and science tells us if it doubles from the current 411ppm plants and crops will grow 30to 40% faster and tree growth will also speed up. CO2 increase also causes plants to reduce to size of the pores in their leaves so require less moisture and thus will grow in drier climates. The temperature may increase by .2degrees or not at all.
    We all need to realise the the planet’s climate is constantly changing with sea levels 120mts lower just 12-13,000 years ago so there is nothing to be concerned about and as for 4mm a year sea level rise, this is just drivel as seas are rising at different levels around the earth and in some areas the land mass is actually sinking rather that sea level rising the actual rate of sea level rise in Sydney harbor is around 0.7mm a year a long way from the claimed 3-4mm a year .

    • Wow this topic has brought out some real pieces of work. Like someone already said, based on the tripe posted above, we are truly doomed.

    • Wow! That post probably has the most logical facilities, wrong facts and cherry picked pieces of information per word count on this page. Well done. The only thing missing is the conspiracy theory!!

      Oh, I heard that Climate Change is real, but the Chinese are spreading and funding all the Climate doubt just so their industry gets a head start on renewable energy manufacturing! (yes, I made this up, but it is a great conspiracy theory to tell the conspiracy theorists.)

  6. If climate change is considered so important, why is nobody addressing the real problem – the number of humans on the planet? Surely the answer to human induced climate change is less humans – so where are the Govts implementing policies such as one child per family? Even China has revoked theirs. I can’t take the climate change movement seriously when all they want to do is virtue signal without dealing with the actual problem – stop having kids. Shrink the population, shrink the cities, less need for food production, more room for trees = problem solved. Anything else is just rubbish.

    • The planet has vastly more trees than 100 years ago. Back then Europe had virtually no forests, all arable land was needed to grow fodder for horse drawn transportation. This applies to many other places.

      Forests have been replanted because of fossil fuelled automobiles.

    • Most environmentalists advocate for widespread and easy access to contraception and abortion, but the only way to reduce global population meaningfully (in volume and timeframe) is to actively kill them, which is not an idea you will find many people getting behind.

    • The current , large number of Humans on the planet, and the way they live, is the very nub of the problem.
      150 years ago, when the human pop. was 1-1.5 billion we became aquainted with Oil.
      It is the consumption of oil, and gas , (we already used Coal) that allowed our numbers to multiply to nearly 8 billion.
      Oil is concerened with absolutely every aspect of our civilisation, our societies and ourselves.
      Our roads, food, transport,medicines, cosmetics, plastics, building materials , clothing, fertilisers, fuel , and supply chains are all fossil fuel dependent, we are oil.
      Oil is an almost magical , but finite substance, to just burn it is an act of vandalism of the highest order.
      But … A consensus of 97%+ of Earth eosystems based scientists, assert that we are courting catastrophic climate change
      by our continuing avoidance of meaningful intellectual, emotional, and physical engagement with containing CO2 emmisions .
      We are faced with having to curtail our use of these fossil fuels . The available alternatives, although they produce far fewer emmissions, are less efficient in bang for the buck. So human numbers,and living standards will fall. Scociety will become less complex.
      This can happen in a logical and civilised manner, or a mad max style of social mayhem.

      • This can happen in a logical and civilised manner, or a mad max style of social mayhem.

        Lock in “B”, Eddie.

  7. Ultimately that is the problem with the climate merchants of doom though isn’t it, make ridiculous predictions that don’t come true, but no matter, simply make even more hysterical predictions pushing the timeline out a bit, rinse and repeat.