4 thoughts on “Strict curbs on global warming would buoy world economy: study”
From the article:
“This represents about $30 trillion in cumulative benefits between now and 2100,” he told a telephone news conference. Such benefits would dwarf the likely costs of shifting the world economy from fossil fuels to cleaner energies.”
Cumulative benefits for whom? Those who are responsible for why we have this problem in the first place? Those who believe that capitalism run rampant is the answer in a world with finite resources? Those who continue to believe that the problem of transportation can be solved by building more bridges and roads?
Believe what you want to believe in that global warming can be stopped at this point, but the reality is, that ship has sailed. Unless we can somehow manage to survive in houseboats, remove salt from water, we are done for. NASA’s pictures of what this planet looks like is going to change drastically and dramatically in the coming decades and the natural disasters are going to worsen. Many island nations will become uninhabitable as some already are since they are now, under water.
You make some excellent points about the article, Shelby. There’s no question it’s written from the point of view of the investor class – I expect those are the folk the author wants to persuade – hence his tone. I much prefer articles that talk about lynching the investor class, but it’s becoming increasingly rare to find them on the Internet.
I think you may also be right about global warming – at this point I would put the odds at 1 in 3 that the human species will survive. But you know me, by now. I’m a perpetual optimist. I always go for those long odds.
In the short term, I would really like to see a transformation to locally produced distributed energy – to give poor people a shot at cheap renewable energy they themselves can control. The energy monopolies have been ripping them off long enough. That way a few of them (the ones that are genetically strong because they aren’t inbred) might have a chance of survival.
Something people dont think about is effect of rising co2 levels
Anyone with any medical background knows how drastically oxygen and co2 changes in ambient air can effect o2 stats in someone with copd or asthma. or even a normal person.
Elevation chages do the same. More co2 in the air means less o2 in the air basic chemisty
Dr. Joseph Romm succinctly explains the problem of rising carbon dioxide levels, citing a study finding adverse cognitive effects from slightly elevated carbon dioxide levels occurring inside buildings:
They found that, on average, a typical participant’s cognitive scores dropped 21 percent with a 400 ppm increase in CO2. Here are their astonishing findings for four of the nine cognitive functions scored in a double-blind test of the impact of elevated CO2 levels….
NASA has also observed CO2-related health impacts on International Space Station (ISS) astronauts at much lower CO2 levels than expected and has identified a mechanism by which CO2 levels could affect the brain, as I will discuss in Part 2. As a result, NASA has already lowered the maximum allowable CO2 levels on the space station.
Here is the study, which you can download and read for free:
Joseph G. Allen, Piers MacNaughton, Usha Satish, Suresh Santanam, Jose Vallarino, and John D. Spengler (2016, June). Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic Compound Exposures in Office Workers: A Controlled Exposure Study of Green and Conventional Office Environments. Environ Health Perspectives 124(6), 805-812; DOI:10.1289/ehp.1510037
Carbon dioxide levels are increasing throughout our environment, not simply within our enclosures.
Increased carbon-dioxide levels would help explain the rising tide of insanity around us. Insanity is clearly visible as eruptions of anger and violence.
From the article:
“This represents about $30 trillion in cumulative benefits between now and 2100,” he told a telephone news conference. Such benefits would dwarf the likely costs of shifting the world economy from fossil fuels to cleaner energies.”
Cumulative benefits for whom? Those who are responsible for why we have this problem in the first place? Those who believe that capitalism run rampant is the answer in a world with finite resources? Those who continue to believe that the problem of transportation can be solved by building more bridges and roads?
Believe what you want to believe in that global warming can be stopped at this point, but the reality is, that ship has sailed. Unless we can somehow manage to survive in houseboats, remove salt from water, we are done for. NASA’s pictures of what this planet looks like is going to change drastically and dramatically in the coming decades and the natural disasters are going to worsen. Many island nations will become uninhabitable as some already are since they are now, under water.
LikeLike
You make some excellent points about the article, Shelby. There’s no question it’s written from the point of view of the investor class – I expect those are the folk the author wants to persuade – hence his tone. I much prefer articles that talk about lynching the investor class, but it’s becoming increasingly rare to find them on the Internet.
I think you may also be right about global warming – at this point I would put the odds at 1 in 3 that the human species will survive. But you know me, by now. I’m a perpetual optimist. I always go for those long odds.
In the short term, I would really like to see a transformation to locally produced distributed energy – to give poor people a shot at cheap renewable energy they themselves can control. The energy monopolies have been ripping them off long enough. That way a few of them (the ones that are genetically strong because they aren’t inbred) might have a chance of survival.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Something people dont think about is effect of rising co2 levels
Anyone with any medical background knows how drastically oxygen and co2 changes in ambient air can effect o2 stats in someone with copd or asthma. or even a normal person.
Elevation chages do the same. More co2 in the air means less o2 in the air basic chemisty
Dr. Joseph Romm succinctly explains the problem of rising carbon dioxide levels, citing a study finding adverse cognitive effects from slightly elevated carbon dioxide levels occurring inside buildings:
They found that, on average, a typical participant’s cognitive scores dropped 21 percent with a 400 ppm increase in CO2. Here are their astonishing findings for four of the nine cognitive functions scored in a double-blind test of the impact of elevated CO2 levels….
NASA has also observed CO2-related health impacts on International Space Station (ISS) astronauts at much lower CO2 levels than expected and has identified a mechanism by which CO2 levels could affect the brain, as I will discuss in Part 2. As a result, NASA has already lowered the maximum allowable CO2 levels on the space station.
Here is the study, which you can download and read for free:
Joseph G. Allen, Piers MacNaughton, Usha Satish, Suresh Santanam, Jose Vallarino, and John D. Spengler (2016, June). Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic Compound Exposures in Office Workers: A Controlled Exposure Study of Green and Conventional Office Environments. Environ Health Perspectives 124(6), 805-812; DOI:10.1289/ehp.1510037
Carbon dioxide levels are increasing throughout our environment, not simply within our enclosures.
Increased carbon-dioxide levels would help explain the rising tide of insanity around us. Insanity is clearly visible as eruptions of anger and violence.
From majia
LikeLike
Interesting theory, Ken. Thanks for the sources.
LikeLike