Have you looked at the North Pole lately?

[Lyfespan]

could you be a little more specific about the "tipping point"?
is this it?


Kirsten Gillibrand Unveils $10 Trillion Climate Change Plan

249View ImageJustin Sullivan/Getty ImagesKyle Morris25 Jul 20191,565 2:06
Democrat presidential hopeful Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) announced Friday a climate change plan that would cost taxpayers an estimated $10 trillion if she is elected.

As part of her proposal, named the “Climate Change Moonshot Plan,” Kirsten Gillibrand aims to achieve net-zero carbon and greenhouse emissions by the year 2050, phase out fossil fuels, and “hold polluters accountable.”
To achieve her goal, Gillibrand has called for “100% clean, renewable, and zero-carbon electricity in a decade.”
“We’re already seeing the effects of climate change on communities across our country and the world,” Gillibrand wrote in a Medium post. “Climate change is the most serious threat to humanity today, and we need immediate and bold action to address it before it’s too late.”
“My plan lays out immediate and bold action to protect our communities and save our planet,” Gillibrand stated. “Not only would I enact the Green New Deal and protect clean air and clean water, but I will reinvest in the communities that have been most impacted by climate change and hold polluters accountable for the damage they’ve caused the American people.”
In order to persuade companies not to use fossil fuels, Gillibrand’s plan also gives carbon a price tag, which starts at $52 per metric ton. Her plan will also end federal subsidies and tax subsidies within the fossil fuel industry. Gillibrand’s plan also ensures that $100 billion will be spent to assist rural areas transition to clean energy.
Gillibrand claims that putting a price on carbon will assist with the costs of her plan.
“The revenue generated from this carbon tax, estimated at more than $200 billion annually, will then go directly back into our country’s transition to renewable energy,” Gillibrand argued.
More information on Gillibrand’s climate change plan can be found here.



https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...rand-unveils-10-trillion-climate-change-plan/


or this?


Senators to Unveil Carbon Tax Bill to Generate $2.5 Trillion in 10 Years

[URL=https://242358-745360-raikfcquaxqncofqfm.stackpathdns.com/wp-content/uploads/avatars/350/5bb4ce4b0adce-bpthumb.png]View Image Reuters [/URL] July 24, 2019, 4:42 pm 3 CommentsView Image
WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 16: U.S. Select Committee on Intelligence chairwoman Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) speaks to members of the media after a hearing on the Benghazi attack November 16, 2012 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. Former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director David Petraeus testified before the committee about the September 11 attacks on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) Two Democratic U.S. senators will unveil a bill on Thursday to curb climate change by slapping a fee on oil, natural gas and coal and delivering most of the revenues to low- and middle-income Americans, one of the lawmakers said.
Senator Chris Coons said on Wednesday he and Senator Dianne Feinstein will introduce the Climate Action Rebate Act, which aims to generate $2.5 trillion in revenues over 10 years starting in 2020. It would rebate about 70 percent of the money to families that make less than $130,000 per year, and use the rest for energy infrastructure, job retraining for fossil fuel workers, and research and development.
President Donald Trump, a Republican, rejects climate science and has slashed regulations on oil and gas drillers and coal miners. That has made climate a big issue in the race for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, although none of the senators running have yet signed onto the Coons carbon tax bill.
Coons said he is talking with Senate colleagues from both parties and Democrats running for president to build support. It will be an uphill battle to get enough votes to pass in the Republican-led 100-member chamber.
The Green New Deal, a plan to tackle climate change backed by left-leaning Democrats including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey, has grabbed the attention of many environmentalists with an aggressive goal of cutting carbon emissions to net zero by 2030. But wind and solar power companies have criticized it as unrealistic and politically divisive.
Coons, a centrist, hopes his bill will channel much of the enthusiasm for the Green New Deal into practical solutions. The bill is a “serious legislative attempt at taking bold vision and turning it into a specific, enactable, concrete strategy,” he said.
The idea of a carbon tax, which aims to level the playing field for emissions-free energy, like solar and wind power, by adding costs to fossil fuels, has been embraced by a wide range of economists from conservatives to liberals.
The Coons bill would cut U.S. carbon emissions 55% by 2030 and 100% by 2050 compared to 2017 levels, a more modest goal than that of the Green New Deal.
A carbon tax is also supported by number of senior Republicans including former Secretaries of State James Baker and George Shultz.
Stephen O’Hanlon, a spokesman for the Sunrise Movement, a youth coalition that helped put the Green New Deal in the media spotlight, said a carbon tax can be part of the solution, but more massive changes are needed to get the energy system off fossil fuels.
A Marist Poll this month showed 63 percent of Americans believed that the Green New Deal was a good idea, versus 50 percent who thought a carbon tax was.
“Any politician serious about passing climate action on the scale we need has got to take note,” of the support for more aggressive action, O’Hanlon said.
Last year Coons introduced a carbon tax bill with Republican Senator Jeff Flake, who has since retired.
A companion carbon tax bill will be introduced in the Democratic-led House of Representatives on Thursday.
(Reporting by Timothy Gardner; Editing by David Gregorio)

https://ijr.com/senators-to-unveil-carbon-tax-bill-to-generate-2-5-trillion-in-10-years/

i can not stand these types of scum, with their fear mongering, and their brilliant plans and promises to save the world on everyone's dime and time.

this type of planet saving plan would have had to be implemented centuries ago and man would have to sacrifice land and resources that lead to the human advancements.

democrats are proof of the idiots leading the mindless, im super cereal, you gotta believe me.

 

[Phaeton]

I cannot stand these types of scum, with their fear mongering, and their brilliant plans and promises while they destroy the world in order to take everyone's nickels and dimes.

Yes, we are past any point of stopping the damage, but...

It can always be made worse, and that is what is going on.
Pretty goddamned sad.

 

[St. Phatty]

could you be a little more specific about the "tipping point"?
is this it?
Kirsten Gillibrand Unveils $10 Trillion Climate Change Plan

I guess there's more than one tipping point.

I was referring to a point of no return on the current warming cycle.


However, there is also a point of no return on the US national debt.

Ms. Gillibrand can contribute by not exhaling.

The US gov. is borrowing money to pay the interest on the debt - when a normal person does that, they are bankrupt.

Adding $10 Trill. for whatever Gillibrand is talking about -
did she offer to contribute 1/2 her salary ?


Very few leaders have a grasp on the problems the US is facing.

I think they showed their true character when BP deliberately pushed a deep water oil rig to the point of failure, causing the Deepwater Horizon incident in 2010, which is far from over.

No manager or corporation was punished for Deepwater Horizon, even though numerous employees described to their families, "they're pushing it too hard, we told them to back off".

 

[trichrider]

do you have the research data confirming a "point of no return", or is it the same as Hank Johnson saying Guam is going to tip over?


i've never seen any data suggesting a "tipping point" past which temperature continues to increase. i have seen data supporting a negative feedback loop which buffers against positive feedback creating an equilibrium.


some pages back iirc.


i suppose the money involved would be a positive feedback loop that will/would bankrupt industrialized nations tho'.

 

[trichrider]

https://www.c-span.org/video/?46047...ns-russia-china-arctic-policy-address-finland


May 6, 2019 Secretary of State Pompeo Remarks on U.S.-Arctic Policy

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo traveled to Finland where he delivered remarks at an Arctic Council ministerial meeting. In his 20-minute remarks, he talked about U.S. policy in the region and warned against China and Russia’s increasing territorial role in the region. He referenced Russia’s ongoing territorial dispute with Ukraine, and added, “...just because the Arctic is a place of wilderness does not mean it should become a place of lawlessness.”



sorry video didn't follow instructions to appear. if you want to see it, the link works...20 minutes or so, on CSPAN.

 

[moose eater]

Just got back from the Yukon Territory (Canada); Kluane Lake (a huge lake), no longer fed by the primary glacial source that had maintained it, has shrunk on the southern shore to the point that what was once shallow lake is now grass-land.

The tall rock Island near the S.W. area of the lake, just off the road, is now a peninsula. You can walk across the newly raised beach there to the Island.

Places south of Destruction Bay where there was once a life guard tower made of long spruce poles (long gone) are now rocky open areas with grasses, rather than the sandy beaches that were there 30-42 years ago.

Folks who bought semi-remote lake-front property there are fairly bummed out.

Aishihik Lake, despite numerous days of fairly stout rain while we were there, is about 3-4 feet lower than the last time we were there, making the boat launch area quite crowded, even with only a couple boats in there at one time.

The out-flow at the leveling dam at Aishihik Lake, which feeds the hydro-electric dam at the south end of Canyon Lake, is cut back to 12% of flow while we were there. Whitehorse relies on that power, and it's already running nip and tuck for output, with their power supply being isolated, lacking any connection to B.C., etc. (i.e., VULNERABLE).

Both of those lakes are approximately 35-40 miles north to south, with holes that exceed 350 ft. deep; Kluane Lake is way deeper than that on the east side of the lake, opposite the Alaska Hwy.

My youngest son, as we were rounding the now semi-dry grass areas on the southern shore, played with the thought of how many gallons would need to be displaced from a body of water that size to have the level decline by 4 ft. LARGE NUMBERS.

Places that relied on large bodies of water for both transportation and food, for thousands of years, will be less suited to such things.

With that, I'm going to increase the carbon content in my air, and smoke a joint of Greenhouse Super Lemon Haze, and take a nap, before making some bat shit tea for the girls. Told my younger son it beats gunpowder green or Lipton all to Hell. 'Just depends on what you're using it for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4SI1h7bOmQ&list=RD10CEkQh7s_I&index=6

 

[St. Phatty]

With that, I'm going to increase the carbon content in my air, and smoke a joint of Greenhouse Super Lemon Haze, and take a nap, before making some bat shit tea for the girls. Told my younger son it beats gunpowder green or Lipton all to Hell. 'Just depends on what you're using it for.

Now there's a worthwhile science experiment.

Yes, burning a nugg of Cannabis generates a little CO2.

BUT it helps us chill-out, and we are carbon based organisms.

If the Cannabis reduces our breathing rate, at some point the system (smoker + cannabis) produces less CO2.

Smoke pot to reduce CO2 production rates !

Smoke pot because it feels so goooood.


What was I going to say. Oh yeah. I've been wondering if the North Shore of Alaska and also Siberia will end up being beach-front property, with good surf breaks.

And that depends on the estimate of sea-level rise. Which depends on a bunch of things.

Barrow Alaska - It's pretty but it will be underwater in the sea level rise scenario.

Miami Florida is the canary in the coal mine. As long as Miami exists (without building a big dike like the Netherlands and New Orleans), sea level rise is minimal, e.g. 1 meter.

 

[moose eater]

The Powers That Be are already relocating a number of older villages in Alaska, due to erosion, water levels, etc.

And I'm out of rep again, as soon as I've returned, it appears.

Central Western Yukon Territory, up near Beaver Creek, all the way home (~350-400 miles) , had high water in the rivers and streams. Southern Yukon, not so much.

 

[Phaeton]

My take on the 'tipping point'.
It is disingenuous to pretend 'tipping point' on the temperature means it will continue to heat up until the mountains turn to lava and the oceans boil away.

Past the tipping point on temperature refers to the climate continuing to warm even if all human activity ceased today.
It will continue to warm and the oceans will continue to rise beyond the lifetime of my grandchildren.

We are past the tipping point as far as business as usual goes. Cropland is not coming back, oceans are not going down, fossil fuels are not increasing, refugee numbers will continue to raise exponentially.

Cherry pick details and argue semantics while the earth burns.
Brilliant, just brilliant.

 

[trichrider]

My take on the 'tipping point'.
It is disingenuous to pretend 'tipping point' on the temperature means it will continue to heat up until the mountains turn to lava and the oceans boil away.

Past the tipping point on temperature refers to the climate continuing to warm even if all human activity ceased today.
It will continue to warm and the oceans will continue to rise beyond the lifetime of my grandchildren.

We are past the tipping point as far as business as usual goes. Cropland is not coming back, oceans are not going down, fossil fuels are not increasing, refugee numbers will continue to raise exponentially.

Cherry pick details and argue semantics while the earth burns.
Brilliant, just brilliant.

just provide the research data that shows that what you state above is fact. any of it. you won't find it.
you could clear this all up with some serious science that backs your contention.
my gosh, it's that simple.

this video posted earlier disputes your hysteria:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CQLBGz8LxU
[/FONT]
[YOUTUBEIF]0CQLBGz8LxU[/YOUTUBEIF]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]i guess you're not even looking at what i post. it would behoove you to so you don't have to worry so much about your grandkids burning up.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]i'm more concerned about my grandkids being shackled by the projected [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]debt [/FONT]of these proposed remedies.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]as you stated, it will do what it will do regardless our actions.[/FONT]

 

[TychoMonolyth]

Just sayin'

 

[TychoMonolyth]

 

[St. Phatty]

My take on the 'tipping point'.
It is disingenuous to pretend 'tipping point' on the temperature means it will continue to heat up until the mountains turn to lava and the oceans boil away.

Who is saying that ?

Human beings are sensitive to a 10 degree change in temperature.

And we just happened to build many of our cities at sea level, sort of guaranteeing maximum impact from something simple like polar ice caps losing 1/2 their water mass.

I don't know about Lava & boiling oceans.

If they ever do a re-make of Miami Vice - in 100 years - it could be a canal city like Venice.

 

[trichrider]

uh, it will not raise sea levels by melting sea ice. it's already in the sea.
if sea ice melt made sea level rise, it would happen every year as it melts, and then sea level would drop as it reformed in the winter.
..and i think he was addressing me, so you needn't have responded with such an inane supposition.





The ice cover in the Arctic grows throughout the winter, before peaking in March. Melting picks up pace during the spring as the sun gets stronger, and in September the extent of the ice cover is typically only around one third of its winter maximum.
Differences may occur in terms of the position of the edge of the ice in the two maps, “Extent of the sea ice” and “Thickness and volume of the sea ice”, as the model calculations do not always correspond exactly to the satellite sensors’ registration of the extent of the ice.
Ice concentrations are based on satellite data and are from the Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility project (OSISAF).
The thickness of the ice shown is calculated by means of the HYCOM-CICE model of sea ice at DMI. The model calculates various oceanographic values, including sea ice, in a grid with cells of 10 x 10 square km. The model is driven by meteorological data from ECMWF (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). In each grid cell the ice is classified into 5 thickness categories, with thickness, concentration, movement and heat balance of the ice being calculated for each category. The map of the ice thickness shows the mean thickness of ice in each grid cell.
The graph on the right shows the annual variation of the volume of the sea ice in the Northern Hemisphere, excluding the Baltic Sea and the Pacific. The volume of the ice is calculated on the basis of the ice thicknesses from the HYCOM-CICE model. In each grid cell the volume is calculated as thickness multiplied with concentration and with area, with contributions from all grid cells to the total volume. The grey band around the climatologic mean value corresponds to plus/minus one standard deviation based on the 10-year average 2004-2013.

https://polarportal.dk/en/sea-ice-and-icebergs/sea-ice-thickness-and-volume/

[youtubeif]kZDtnq9A-Bg[/youtubeif]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZDtnq9A-Bg

 

[Lyfespan]

uh, it will not raise sea levels by melting sea ice. it's already in the sea.
if sea ice melt made sea level rise, it would happen every year as it melts, and then sea level would drop as it reformed in the winter.
..and i think he was addressing me, so you needn't have responded with such an inane supposition.





The ice cover in the Arctic grows throughout the winter, before peaking in March. Melting picks up pace during the spring as the sun gets stronger, and in September the extent of the ice cover is typically only around one third of its winter maximum.
Differences may occur in terms of the position of the edge of the ice in the two maps, “Extent of the sea ice” and “Thickness and volume of the sea ice”, as the model calculations do not always correspond exactly to the satellite sensors’ registration of the extent of the ice.
Ice concentrations are based on satellite data and are from the Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility project (OSISAF).
The thickness of the ice shown is calculated by means of the HYCOM-CICE model of sea ice at DMI. The model calculates various oceanographic values, including sea ice, in a grid with cells of 10 x 10 square km. The model is driven by meteorological data from ECMWF (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). In each grid cell the ice is classified into 5 thickness categories, with thickness, concentration, movement and heat balance of the ice being calculated for each category. The map of the ice thickness shows the mean thickness of ice in each grid cell.
The graph on the right shows the annual variation of the volume of the sea ice in the Northern Hemisphere, excluding the Baltic Sea and the Pacific. The volume of the ice is calculated on the basis of the ice thicknesses from the HYCOM-CICE model. In each grid cell the volume is calculated as thickness multiplied with concentration and with area, with contributions from all grid cells to the total volume. The grey band around the climatologic mean value corresponds to plus/minus one standard deviation based on the 10-year average 2004-2013.

https://polarportal.dk/en/sea-ice-and-icebergs/sea-ice-thickness-and-volume/

[youtubeif]kZDtnq9A-Bg[/youtubeif]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZDtnq9A-Bg

im dead people will rave about the fucking sky falling, but not understand simple displacement, wow

 

[Lyfespan]

uh, it will not raise sea levels by melting sea ice. it's already in the sea.
if sea ice melt made sea level rise, it would happen every year as it melts, and then sea level would drop as it reformed in the winter.
..and i think he was addressing me, so you needn't have responded with such an inane supposition.





The ice cover in the Arctic grows throughout the winter, before peaking in March. Melting picks up pace during the spring as the sun gets stronger, and in September the extent of the ice cover is typically only around one third of its winter maximum.
Differences may occur in terms of the position of the edge of the ice in the two maps, “Extent of the sea ice” and “Thickness and volume of the sea ice”, as the model calculations do not always correspond exactly to the satellite sensors’ registration of the extent of the ice.
Ice concentrations are based on satellite data and are from the Ocean and Sea Ice Satellite Application Facility project (OSISAF).
The thickness of the ice shown is calculated by means of the HYCOM-CICE model of sea ice at DMI. The model calculates various oceanographic values, including sea ice, in a grid with cells of 10 x 10 square km. The model is driven by meteorological data from ECMWF (European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). In each grid cell the ice is classified into 5 thickness categories, with thickness, concentration, movement and heat balance of the ice being calculated for each category. The map of the ice thickness shows the mean thickness of ice in each grid cell.
The graph on the right shows the annual variation of the volume of the sea ice in the Northern Hemisphere, excluding the Baltic Sea and the Pacific. The volume of the ice is calculated on the basis of the ice thicknesses from the HYCOM-CICE model. In each grid cell the volume is calculated as thickness multiplied with concentration and with area, with contributions from all grid cells to the total volume. The grey band around the climatologic mean value corresponds to plus/minus one standard deviation based on the 10-year average 2004-2013.

https://polarportal.dk/en/sea-ice-and-icebergs/sea-ice-thickness-and-volume/

[youtubeif]kZDtnq9A-Bg[/youtubeif]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZDtnq9A-Bg

the real issue hiding in the ice melts is DESALINIZATION

 

[St. Phatty]

the real issue hiding in the ice melts is DESALINIZATION

if the saline level in the ocean drops 1% because of dilution - how does it matter ?

It could matter by affecting pH. The absorption of CO2 somehow affects the pH and the coral.

In any case, I hear that jellyfish and king crabs like the new set up.

I like crab.

 

[Lyfespan]

if the saline level in the ocean drops 1% because of dilution - how does it matter ?

It could matter by affecting pH. The absorption of CO2 somehow affects the pH and the coral.

In any case, I hear that jellyfish and king crabs like the new set up.

I like crab.

it tangential, how many variables do you think could possible be affected, by saline levels in the oceans?

 

[Frylock]

im dead people will rave about the fucking sky falling, but not understand simple displacement, wow

Sea ice melting does not affect sea levels at all.... there is no real displacement....

Land ice on the other hand....

 

[Lyfespan]

Sea ice melting does not affect sea levels at all.... there is no real displacement....

Land ice on the other hand....

holy fuck another dense reply.

im making fun of the fact that people think ice in the oceans will make water levels rise

see but youre so quick to try and jump on me because, why. i make statements you dont like