Extreme heat, tropical cyclones, and more: visualized
August 20, 2023 11:05 AM Subscribe
Mapping where the earth will become uninhabitable. By the year 2100, all areas that are red in the visualisation will become “uninhabitable”. Extreme heat, tropical cyclones, rising sea levels, water stress or a combination of those are projected to make it difficult or impossible to live there.
It seems that I'm going to need:
1. a pontoons
2. more pontoons
posted by MonsieurPEB at 11:44 AM on August 20, 2023 [9 favorites]
1. a pontoons
2. more pontoons
posted by MonsieurPEB at 11:44 AM on August 20, 2023 [9 favorites]
Looks like most of India will be uninhabitable.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:45 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 11:45 AM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
Lots of the visualizations seem very truthy, and they serve to illustrate the central point I think they're trying to illustrate.
But a lot of the specifics don't make much sense. For instance, the map asserts that nowhere in the United States will be uninhabitable due to heat by 2100. That's preposterous.
posted by gurple at 11:48 AM on August 20, 2023 [21 favorites]
But a lot of the specifics don't make much sense. For instance, the map asserts that nowhere in the United States will be uninhabitable due to heat by 2100. That's preposterous.
posted by gurple at 11:48 AM on August 20, 2023 [21 favorites]
the map asserts that nowhere in the United States will be uninhabitable due to heat by 2100. That's preposterous.
Certainly a true criticism, as there are places in the US which are uninhabitable due to heat right now. But I think the visualization effects are normalized to population, and the overlap of "highly populous US locations" and "potentially dangerous heat locales" is actually fairly small: Houston, Phoenix, maybe the inland parts of LA.
(This is why India looks particularly dire: the combination of being in a fragile climatic zone and highly populous is a big deal. As a percentage of population, every single south Pacific coral-atoll nation is much more fucked by climate change than India because they will have 100% uninhabitability due to sea-level rise, but in raw numbers, India is where climate change is going to cause the highest human toll.)
posted by jackbishop at 11:59 AM on August 20, 2023 [13 favorites]
Certainly a true criticism, as there are places in the US which are uninhabitable due to heat right now. But I think the visualization effects are normalized to population, and the overlap of "highly populous US locations" and "potentially dangerous heat locales" is actually fairly small: Houston, Phoenix, maybe the inland parts of LA.
(This is why India looks particularly dire: the combination of being in a fragile climatic zone and highly populous is a big deal. As a percentage of population, every single south Pacific coral-atoll nation is much more fucked by climate change than India because they will have 100% uninhabitability due to sea-level rise, but in raw numbers, India is where climate change is going to cause the highest human toll.)
posted by jackbishop at 11:59 AM on August 20, 2023 [13 favorites]
They need some kind of border notation, hard for me to see exatly which bits are the countries I am selecting.
posted by Meatbomb at 12:03 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by Meatbomb at 12:03 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
Interesting and depressing, as most climate stuff is these days, but from a visual display of information point of view, the globa-and hexagon thing is more confusing than helpful.
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:06 PM on August 20, 2023 [15 favorites]
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:06 PM on August 20, 2023 [15 favorites]
It also stands to reason that some currently-uninhabitable places will likely become at least temporarily more habitable by humans except for the increase in violent storms, and the resulting mass migrations are already helping skew these predictions in all kinds of weird ways (mostly still negative, but interesting).
posted by aspersioncast at 12:40 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by aspersioncast at 12:40 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
According to this, the Great Lakes are going to be one big bayou.
posted by clavdivs at 12:49 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by clavdivs at 12:49 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
I'm a little surprised that Phoenix and Las Vegas don't show up as unliveably hot.
posted by The Ardship of Cambry at 1:37 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by The Ardship of Cambry at 1:37 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Hey, this is (a) great (visualization)! I've played with many widgets like these over the years, and this seems the most transparent.
For those who care about cookies, trackers, etc.: you may wish to look at the full list of cookies before clicking "accept all." It seems like a pretty long list to me.
posted by cupcakeninja at 1:37 PM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
For those who care about cookies, trackers, etc.: you may wish to look at the full list of cookies before clicking "accept all." It seems like a pretty long list to me.
posted by cupcakeninja at 1:37 PM on August 20, 2023 [4 favorites]
But a lot of the specifics don't make much sense. For instance, the map asserts that nowhere in the United States will be uninhabitable due to heat by 2100. That's preposterous.
The site is using wet bulb temps to calculate that and so seems to be a very exact definition of "unliveable". Say what you will about California and the southwest, but I wouldn't expect to see wet bulb temps there.
posted by rhymedirective at 1:49 PM on August 20, 2023 [6 favorites]
The site is using wet bulb temps to calculate that and so seems to be a very exact definition of "unliveable". Say what you will about California and the southwest, but I wouldn't expect to see wet bulb temps there.
posted by rhymedirective at 1:49 PM on August 20, 2023 [6 favorites]
Technological, man made interventions like large-scale pumping stations by oceans or air conditioning are not taken into account.
posted by Going To Maine at 2:33 PM on August 20, 2023
posted by Going To Maine at 2:33 PM on August 20, 2023
According to this, the Great Lakes are going to be one big bayou
This honestly could work. What’s the hot sauce situation in Detroit like these days?
posted by thivaia at 2:55 PM on August 20, 2023 [8 favorites]
This honestly could work. What’s the hot sauce situation in Detroit like these days?
posted by thivaia at 2:55 PM on August 20, 2023 [8 favorites]
This is the real reason behind Build The Wall.
posted by hypnogogue at 3:30 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by hypnogogue at 3:30 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
the overlap of "highly populous US locations" and "potentially dangerous heat locales" is actually fairly small: Houston, Phoenix, maybe the inland parts of LA.
This is, no pun intended, chilling. The interactivity on my small phone isnt great, but it seems to show a huge portion of California as uninhabitable.
According to this, the Great Lakes are going to be one big bayou.
I was going to say anyone alive then should move to my state of Michigan, but evidently it will have merged with Ontario.
posted by NorthernLite at 3:33 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
This is, no pun intended, chilling. The interactivity on my small phone isnt great, but it seems to show a huge portion of California as uninhabitable.
According to this, the Great Lakes are going to be one big bayou.
I was going to say anyone alive then should move to my state of Michigan, but evidently it will have merged with Ontario.
posted by NorthernLite at 3:33 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
This is what makes me the most uncomfortable about the rise of the Far Right/Evangelicals in the US.
Even as they continue to deny the ever more overwhelmingly obvious causes and their inevitable effects, they are already living in the bleakest version of this future, in which the borders of the US, Canada, Russia, and every other temperate country with empty and relatively livable territory really are under siege by 100s of millions of desperate immigrants fighting for their very lives, and facing a heavily armed and utterly merciless mainly white populace which is determined to keep them out at any cost.
posted by jamjam at 3:47 PM on August 20, 2023 [13 favorites]
Even as they continue to deny the ever more overwhelmingly obvious causes and their inevitable effects, they are already living in the bleakest version of this future, in which the borders of the US, Canada, Russia, and every other temperate country with empty and relatively livable territory really are under siege by 100s of millions of desperate immigrants fighting for their very lives, and facing a heavily armed and utterly merciless mainly white populace which is determined to keep them out at any cost.
posted by jamjam at 3:47 PM on August 20, 2023 [13 favorites]
they are already living in the bleakest version of this future
Just watch: they're going to turn on a dime, all of them, at once, from "climate change isn't real" to "climate change is totally real and the vengeance of our god upon us all for letting queer people exist". It'll make your head spin.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 4:53 PM on August 20, 2023 [28 favorites]
Just watch: they're going to turn on a dime, all of them, at once, from "climate change isn't real" to "climate change is totally real and the vengeance of our god upon us all for letting queer people exist". It'll make your head spin.
posted by outgrown_hobnail at 4:53 PM on August 20, 2023 [28 favorites]
extrapolations and visualizations like this are interesting, but let me offer some caveats.
1) IPCC modelling omits many non-linear amplifying feedbacks (for many good and not good reasons) and are thus inherently under-estimates and overly optimistic.
2) This particular extrapolation to 2100 (based on Climate Action Tracker) is targeting a 2.7C rise by 2100, falling roughly between RCP 6.0 and RCP 4. (higher number = more watts per square meter of heating). Our current emissions and our emissions for the past decade exceed the RCP 8.5 scenario (colloquially called either business-as-usual, or high emissions.
3) This is based on pledges of nations to the Paris Climate conference.
4) To continue meeting the trajectories used here, we would have to invent and massively deploy technologies that remove GHG from the atmosophere and store them somewhere stable, and do so at the scale of the planets economy run in reverse for decades.
So its a good visualization for comparative vulnerability, but its not a good way to decide if your hexagon (ugh!) is a good place to stay. Hint, no place is a good place during the end-holocene mass extinction.
For a fun mash-up take any hexagon, and figure out how far you can drive from it in 1 day, and then figure out how many millions of cars and guns are in that hexagon, and you'll see the idea of "my hexagon will be ok, even if someone-else's hexagon is f-ed" is just a fatal modernist illusion.
posted by AnchoriteOfPalgrave at 5:59 PM on August 20, 2023 [12 favorites]
1) IPCC modelling omits many non-linear amplifying feedbacks (for many good and not good reasons) and are thus inherently under-estimates and overly optimistic.
2) This particular extrapolation to 2100 (based on Climate Action Tracker) is targeting a 2.7C rise by 2100, falling roughly between RCP 6.0 and RCP 4. (higher number = more watts per square meter of heating). Our current emissions and our emissions for the past decade exceed the RCP 8.5 scenario (colloquially called either business-as-usual, or high emissions.
3) This is based on pledges of nations to the Paris Climate conference.
4) To continue meeting the trajectories used here, we would have to invent and massively deploy technologies that remove GHG from the atmosophere and store them somewhere stable, and do so at the scale of the planets economy run in reverse for decades.
So its a good visualization for comparative vulnerability, but its not a good way to decide if your hexagon (ugh!) is a good place to stay. Hint, no place is a good place during the end-holocene mass extinction.
For a fun mash-up take any hexagon, and figure out how far you can drive from it in 1 day, and then figure out how many millions of cars and guns are in that hexagon, and you'll see the idea of "my hexagon will be ok, even if someone-else's hexagon is f-ed" is just a fatal modernist illusion.
posted by AnchoriteOfPalgrave at 5:59 PM on August 20, 2023 [12 favorites]
Just watch: they're going to turn on a dime, all of them, at once, from "climate change isn't real" to "climate change is totally real and the vengeance of our god upon us all for letting queer people exist". It'll make your head spin.
There will also be a grinding gear shift from, "Scientists don't know anything and tell us whatever they are paid to," to "If scientists have known this for years, why didn't they do anything about it before it got this bad?"
posted by ricochet biscuit at 6:49 PM on August 20, 2023 [25 favorites]
There will also be a grinding gear shift from, "Scientists don't know anything and tell us whatever they are paid to," to "If scientists have known this for years, why didn't they do anything about it before it got this bad?"
posted by ricochet biscuit at 6:49 PM on August 20, 2023 [25 favorites]
Hurricane Hilary is going to be extremely expensive, and California already has tremendously escalated home insurance costs, with some providers leaving the state. As people begin to grasp the realities, blame will be a popular commodity. Interesting site, but people keep thinking that a bit of sea rise here, a warmer climate there, a hurricane, isn't a crisis. The unprecedented wildfires around the globe, rising ocean temps, killing heat waves, and all the rest are the just a start. There's still hope for mitigation, but not without a massive effort. /doomer
posted by theora55 at 7:20 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by theora55 at 7:20 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
We've been very bad at explaining that a rise of 2.5C isn't just a steady 2.5C rise everyday, but a an increase in of the average and expanding error bars, climate will just get weirder and unpredictable. This is going to be incredibly difficult to manage for agriculture, and and well the repercussions are hard to fathom, but there's no way a lot of people won't be suffering.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:45 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:45 PM on August 20, 2023 [1 favorite]
Also I hate that thing, just colors, and you can focus a tile to know why there's an issue there.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:47 PM on August 20, 2023
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:47 PM on August 20, 2023
I think you mean can't focus a tile. Show me why you are saying this for this spot pls.
posted by Windopaene at 8:59 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Windopaene at 8:59 PM on August 20, 2023 [2 favorites]
For a fun mash-up take any hexagon, and figure out how far you can drive from it in 1 day, and then figure out how many millions of cars and guns are in that hexagon, and you'll see the idea of "my hexagon will be ok, even if someone-else's hexagon is f-ed" is just a fatal modernist illusion.
posted by AnchoriteOfPalgrave
Indeed. If there is any issue on which isolationism is the worst possible response, it is climate change. Directly or indirectly, nowhere will be safe.
For example, leaving aside any direct effects, if climate change is not stopped then my own country, Australia, is going to be flooded with millions of climate refugees from SE Asia at some point, far beyond the numbers we could even stop at the border, let alone cope with allowing in.
posted by Pouteria at 10:37 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by AnchoriteOfPalgrave
Indeed. If there is any issue on which isolationism is the worst possible response, it is climate change. Directly or indirectly, nowhere will be safe.
For example, leaving aside any direct effects, if climate change is not stopped then my own country, Australia, is going to be flooded with millions of climate refugees from SE Asia at some point, far beyond the numbers we could even stop at the border, let alone cope with allowing in.
posted by Pouteria at 10:37 PM on August 20, 2023 [3 favorites]
I support any country/region taking in as many refugees (human and other species) as possible. But I make the remark to remind people that the idea of places being "remote" or "safe" or 'spared' is a fallacy. Bonus back of envelope. A person who spends 8 hours sleeping, 8 hours foraging for supplies and 8 hours walking at a slow pace of 2 miles an hour will be able to cover 5840 miles in a year. That is enough for a person starting anywhere in a North America to get to anywhere else in North America. Same goes for South America, same goes for Australia, same for Indian subcontinent and European subcontinent, same for within china. Really any continent unless that continent is Asia, or unless you add 10 days for residents of Cape-Town South Africa to get to Cairo.
There is only one life boat, and it is earth. Our mental attempts to subdivide it, to declare part of it first-class etc is counter-productive and part-and-parcel to what got us in this mess: the belief that some people can benefit by sticking other people with the externalities.
Maps of risk and hazard should be prompts to us figuring out how to relocate people, species and ecosystems to new locations, generally higher above sea-level, toward the coasts and the moderating effects of deep water, poleward and away from expanding hadley cell deserts, and out of valley bottoms and flood plains, off of permafrost etc. We made paradise a hell and now we have to both stop making the damage worse, slow the effects, and rescue as much as we can. If you are in a 'nice' hexagon, prepare your spare bed and start your garden now.
posted by AnchoriteOfPalgrave at 12:41 AM on August 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
There is only one life boat, and it is earth. Our mental attempts to subdivide it, to declare part of it first-class etc is counter-productive and part-and-parcel to what got us in this mess: the belief that some people can benefit by sticking other people with the externalities.
Maps of risk and hazard should be prompts to us figuring out how to relocate people, species and ecosystems to new locations, generally higher above sea-level, toward the coasts and the moderating effects of deep water, poleward and away from expanding hadley cell deserts, and out of valley bottoms and flood plains, off of permafrost etc. We made paradise a hell and now we have to both stop making the damage worse, slow the effects, and rescue as much as we can. If you are in a 'nice' hexagon, prepare your spare bed and start your garden now.
posted by AnchoriteOfPalgrave at 12:41 AM on August 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
2) This particular extrapolation to 2100 (based on Climate Action Tracker) is targeting a 2.7C rise by 2100, falling roughly between RCP 6.0 and RCP 4. (higher number = more watts per square meter of heating). Our current emissions and our emissions for the past decade exceed the RCP 8.5 scenario (colloquially called either business-as-usual, or high emissions.
Is that right? My understanding is that RCP 8.5 was never actually a realistic scenario nor was it meant to be and that we probably don't have enough oil and gas reserves to do it even in an unconstrained situation.
The previous generation of climate scenarios started with economic and social scenarios (SSPs), generated emissions profiles from those, and then ran those through a model of the climate.
The RCP's were adopted because model run-times were getting out of control and this kind of tight coupling between models was considered undesirable. Instead, climate models would run starting from a set of climate forcing factors (the RCPs) and social / economic / emissions scenarios could be compared to the RCPs to see which one was closer. However in the process of coming up with the RCPs nobody ever checked how realistic they were and therefore we ended up with a high end scenario, RCP 8.5, which wasn't really plausible at any point but has come to be used as the "do nothing" scenario.
That's my understanding based on an explanation from an experienced climate modeller. I may however have mangled it somewhere though so happy to be corrected.
3) This is based on pledges of nations to the Paris Climate conference.
I think the CAT 2.7C is based on current policies as implemented. Pledges and targets would get us to 2.0C
posted by atrazine at 1:22 AM on August 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Is that right? My understanding is that RCP 8.5 was never actually a realistic scenario nor was it meant to be and that we probably don't have enough oil and gas reserves to do it even in an unconstrained situation.
The previous generation of climate scenarios started with economic and social scenarios (SSPs), generated emissions profiles from those, and then ran those through a model of the climate.
The RCP's were adopted because model run-times were getting out of control and this kind of tight coupling between models was considered undesirable. Instead, climate models would run starting from a set of climate forcing factors (the RCPs) and social / economic / emissions scenarios could be compared to the RCPs to see which one was closer. However in the process of coming up with the RCPs nobody ever checked how realistic they were and therefore we ended up with a high end scenario, RCP 8.5, which wasn't really plausible at any point but has come to be used as the "do nothing" scenario.
That's my understanding based on an explanation from an experienced climate modeller. I may however have mangled it somewhere though so happy to be corrected.
3) This is based on pledges of nations to the Paris Climate conference.
I think the CAT 2.7C is based on current policies as implemented. Pledges and targets would get us to 2.0C
posted by atrazine at 1:22 AM on August 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Afaik almost everyone thinks RCP 8.5 looks unlikely now, well from human sources alone. We've no similarly fast historical changes, so alone tipping pints should not produce similar heating either, but maybe similar heating could occur if human sources interact with tipping points.
We've otoh learned that lower RCPs turn out much worse than we realized. "Eventual global warming due to today's GHG forcing alone [RCP 4.1] after slow feedbacks operate is about +10°C" [and +60m sea level rise, after maybe 1000 years or so] (James Hansen et al. 2022).
posted by jeffburdges at 3:14 AM on August 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
We've otoh learned that lower RCPs turn out much worse than we realized. "Eventual global warming due to today's GHG forcing alone [RCP 4.1] after slow feedbacks operate is about +10°C" [and +60m sea level rise, after maybe 1000 years or so] (James Hansen et al. 2022).
posted by jeffburdges at 3:14 AM on August 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
By this, I'm concluding high chance for India to go rogue with climate manipulation during this century regardless of everything.
posted by Arkki at 3:43 AM on August 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by Arkki at 3:43 AM on August 21, 2023 [5 favorites]
Yes, that's my understanding also: higher RCPs are less likely due to a combination of model specification (i.e. some were never likely) and evidence for shift away from fossil fuels. But... bad news is that Very Bad things might happen at lower RCP levels than previously thought because of both sudden effects which are hard to model and long term climate equilibrium settling much higher (the Hansen paper).
Arkki, I don't think of it as going "rogue" since I think they are morally entitled to such action. I do think that regardless of international consensus they will act, even if there was a consensus against rather than current which is no consensus either way. I don't regard that as rogue but I understand why others might characterise it that way. See the thread on accelerated rock weathering - India has a lot of farmland and a lot of basaltic rock (the Deccan traps are basaltic for instance) so can easily take unilateral action on a massive scale.
posted by atrazine at 5:44 AM on August 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Arkki, I don't think of it as going "rogue" since I think they are morally entitled to such action. I do think that regardless of international consensus they will act, even if there was a consensus against rather than current which is no consensus either way. I don't regard that as rogue but I understand why others might characterise it that way. See the thread on accelerated rock weathering - India has a lot of farmland and a lot of basaltic rock (the Deccan traps are basaltic for instance) so can easily take unilateral action on a massive scale.
posted by atrazine at 5:44 AM on August 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
The young couple emerged into a clearing in the Indiana Tropical Rainforest. They found their way inside the abandoned structure and built a small fire. It was hot and humid, but it was the only way to dry off. Nobody would ever read those books anyway.
Staring iinto the flames. lost in thought, presently that man spoke. "We got rid of all *those* people, just like Jesus wanted, but still He is punishing us with this rain and heat. What else can we do to make Him happy?"
The young woman said nothing. Females weren't allowed to speak.
posted by ambulocetus at 6:01 AM on August 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
Staring iinto the flames. lost in thought, presently that man spoke. "We got rid of all *those* people, just like Jesus wanted, but still He is punishing us with this rain and heat. What else can we do to make Him happy?"
The young woman said nothing. Females weren't allowed to speak.
posted by ambulocetus at 6:01 AM on August 21, 2023 [8 favorites]
Windopaene, yes I meant can't, sorry didn't see it when I wrote it.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:33 AM on August 21, 2023
posted by WaterAndPixels at 7:33 AM on August 21, 2023
By this, I'm concluding high chance for India to go rogue with climate manipulation during this century regardless of everything.
Why blame India? Looks to me like 50% of California is hit harder than anywhere in the US (maybe the desert southwest, but not that many people live there anyways) with currently a larger GDP than India by half a trillion dollars. The US is going to be the ones who attempt to 'manipulate' the climate. Maybe since the US is a world power it doesn't count as 'going rogue'?
I could be wrong - that map is kind of terrible.
posted by The_Vegetables at 1:37 PM on August 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
Why blame India? Looks to me like 50% of California is hit harder than anywhere in the US (maybe the desert southwest, but not that many people live there anyways) with currently a larger GDP than India by half a trillion dollars. The US is going to be the ones who attempt to 'manipulate' the climate. Maybe since the US is a world power it doesn't count as 'going rogue'?
I could be wrong - that map is kind of terrible.
posted by The_Vegetables at 1:37 PM on August 21, 2023 [3 favorites]
And I mean California by itself has a larger GDP than India by half a trillion dollars. Not all the US.
posted by The_Vegetables at 1:39 PM on August 21, 2023
posted by The_Vegetables at 1:39 PM on August 21, 2023
I could be wrong - that map is kind of terrible.
Yeah, unless I'm (a) reading it wrong or (b) it's not rendering properly (it's slow as dogshit for me), it's claiming that nowhere in Australia experiences temperatures above 32C now, let along in 2100.
That is clearly false, as my sweaty summer buttcrack has been able to attest 'lo these past 40 years.
posted by coriolisdave at 3:12 PM on August 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Yeah, unless I'm (a) reading it wrong or (b) it's not rendering properly (it's slow as dogshit for me), it's claiming that nowhere in Australia experiences temperatures above 32C now, let along in 2100.
That is clearly false, as my sweaty summer buttcrack has been able to attest 'lo these past 40 years.
posted by coriolisdave at 3:12 PM on August 21, 2023 [1 favorite]
Yeah, unless I'm (a) reading it wrong or (b) it's not rendering properly (it's slow as dogshit for me), it's claiming that nowhere in Australia experiences temperatures above 32C now, let along in 2100.
It's mapping wetbulb temperature, which is heat + humidity. Maybe Australia is dry?
posted by subdee at 7:43 PM on August 21, 2023
It's mapping wetbulb temperature, which is heat + humidity. Maybe Australia is dry?
posted by subdee at 7:43 PM on August 21, 2023
Maybe Australia is dry?
For florida values of dry, sure
posted by coriolisdave at 8:34 PM on August 21, 2023
For florida values of dry, sure
posted by coriolisdave at 8:34 PM on August 21, 2023
Maybe Australia is dry?
Not up here in the tropical north during monsoon season. The pre-monsoon build-up (approx. Oct-Dec) in particular is going to get even more brutal than it already is.
More southern parts of coastal Oz can also get pretty hot and humid during summer, albeit usually not for months on end like it does in the tropics region.
posted by Pouteria at 8:56 PM on August 21, 2023
Not up here in the tropical north during monsoon season. The pre-monsoon build-up (approx. Oct-Dec) in particular is going to get even more brutal than it already is.
More southern parts of coastal Oz can also get pretty hot and humid during summer, albeit usually not for months on end like it does in the tropics region.
posted by Pouteria at 8:56 PM on August 21, 2023
Why blame India? Looks to me like 50% of California is hit harder than anywhere in the US (maybe the desert southwest, but not that many people live there anyways) with currently a larger GDP than India by half a trillion dollars. The US is going to be the ones who attempt to 'manipulate' the climate. Maybe since the US is a world power it doesn't count as 'going rogue'?
India has a much higher population, with nowhere else to go, and a reduced access to AC. A high wet bulb heat wave could be absolutely devastating.
The US going rogue is somewhat on brand recently but not caring about climate change also is. When climate change finally gets the attention it deserves in the US I guess we’ll see, may depend on who controls the house/senate/WH.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 5:17 AM on August 22, 2023
India has a much higher population, with nowhere else to go, and a reduced access to AC. A high wet bulb heat wave could be absolutely devastating.
The US going rogue is somewhat on brand recently but not caring about climate change also is. When climate change finally gets the attention it deserves in the US I guess we’ll see, may depend on who controls the house/senate/WH.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 5:17 AM on August 22, 2023
Mainly I think USA has better means to faciliate conseqeunces of climate change than India. Climate manipulation to cool things down effectively ain't exactly that new, expensive or hard to do: it is known that spraying ccertain sulfur-compounds or other chems (calcite came across somewhere recently) in stratosphere over the seas will reflect the sunlight in significant amounts. Overall there is loose global agreement that such is last option not to be taken carelessly as effects spread far and hard to predict. But if things go very bad, have no doubt that some nation will take on it if they want to save themselves. While fitting to profile, I trust USA can handle itself decently without, but the pressure to act will likely be much higher in India.
posted by Arkki at 6:37 AM on August 22, 2023
posted by Arkki at 6:37 AM on August 22, 2023
In a hundred years, a World War will be fought over the verdant farmlands of Greenland.
posted by neuron at 9:35 AM on August 23, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by neuron at 9:35 AM on August 23, 2023 [1 favorite]
India is run by fossil fuel moguls right now, so they won't do much this decade. If otoh we look longer term then yes India has options California lacks.
India or China could probably force the west to quickly degrow and partially decorbonise, but any move like that requires buildup, so maybe mid century or something. It's faster than what the west would do all by itself, but not really soo fast.
I suspect the narrative "last one with oil wins" might present a faster approach: Instead of a positive sum competition to obtain & burn more oil & gas, nations should engage in a negative sum game to prevent adversaries from obtaining oil & gas.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:45 PM on August 23, 2023
India or China could probably force the west to quickly degrow and partially decorbonise, but any move like that requires buildup, so maybe mid century or something. It's faster than what the west would do all by itself, but not really soo fast.
I suspect the narrative "last one with oil wins" might present a faster approach: Instead of a positive sum competition to obtain & burn more oil & gas, nations should engage in a negative sum game to prevent adversaries from obtaining oil & gas.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:45 PM on August 23, 2023
« Older What Happens to All the Stuff We Return? | It's Hard Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Horace Rumpole at 11:34 AM on August 20, 2023 [13 favorites]