Climate change will affect us as photographers by ending some opportunities (disappearance of Arctic and Antarctic photo sites) and open up some new ones (lots of documentary opportunities). We had a previous thread on this topic in The Coffee Corner that was shut down because the ad hominem attacks got out of hand. This is a second attempt to focus the topic on science and key issues. Ray and I posted on the existing thread about Changes in the Coffee Corner and are willing to give this another shot. Personal attacks won't be tolerated and if we cannot lock the thread, we will contact Chris.
Let's keep this civil and focus on the research and issues that are coming forward.
As the first post, let me point you to an interesting article in The Guardian from researchers at the University of Melbourne (Ray's country!!!) who project a 1.3 meter rise in sea level unless coal burning for energy is phased out.
Alan,
That's an excellent example of 'alarmist' news. One of the effects of 'alarm' is that it reduces our ability to think clearly about an issue.
My impression of this new paper mentioned in The Guardian (which is a very 'Pro-AGW newspaper), is that the research is again heavily based upon computer models.
To quote from the article:
"The new paper by Alexander Nauels from the University of Melbourne and colleagues uses simplified physical models............. ""Nauels said his team’s work assumed that Antarctica would contribute to sea level rise as was suggested by the 2016 paper by DeConto, but more work was needed to confirm those findings."“We still have to find out what’s going on in Antarctica,” he told the Guardian. “We can’t base all future sea level rise projects on just one paper. And the Antarctic ice sheet community are frantically working on the new insights.”
What we should be doing, for the benefit of all humanity, is address the issues that are
known with a high degree of certainty, rather than divert money, energy and resources towards tackling an imaginary scenario in the future based upon an incomplete and sometimes erroneous understanding of a very complex subject.
The argument is often presented, by the alarmists, that it's better to do
something, when there's a perceived risk, than do
nothing. However, this is a false dichotomy. No sensible, organised and developed society does 'nothing' to protect its citizens.
Floods, droughts, hurricanes, heat waves and cold spells, are not new. They are a natural part of climate and have been occurring throughout history. To successfully tackle the very real risks of harm from such extreme events, that have occurred frequently in the past, way before the beginning of the industrial revolution, requires massive amounts of energy in order to build flood-mitigation dams, elevate roads and buildings above previous flood levels, strengthen homes to resist hurricanes (in regions that are subject to hurricane activity), build dykes or levees to protect cities from either rising sea levels or natural sinking due to the weight of the infrastructure, and so on.
Making energy more expensive, and/or less reliable, by imposing a ban on all CO2-emitting forms of energy, will no doubt result in less attention and resources being directed towards solving the real problems of protecting ourselves from the expected repetition of previously recorded, extreme weather events.
However, I can appreciate that demonizing CO2 can be politically popular. It can create a false sense of security, and can also be used to counteract any blame of incompetence which could be directed at a government as a result of flood or hurricane damage which could have been avoided if the government had paid attention to the history of extreme weather events in the area and organized its building codes and approvals accordingly.
The first comment in the news media whenever there's a devastating storm, is often to suggest that such an event is yet another example of climate change, thus reinforcing the meme that mankind's emissions of CO2 are to blame, and if we stop such emissions, our climate will become benign and our children, and their children, will live happily and securely forever after.