• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    TUHOKlimaticka zmena / Thank you so much for ruining my day


    "Given the sheer enormity of climate change, it’s okay to be depressed, to grieve. But please, don’t stay there too long. Join me in pure, unadulterated, righteous anger."


    "I don’t want your hope. I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. And then I want you to act. Once you start to act, the hope is everywhere."

    "Our best scientists tell us insistently that a calamity is unfolding, that the life-support systems of the Earth are being damaged in ways that threaten our survival. Yet in the face of these facts we carry on as usual."

    “We’ve got to stop burning fossil fuels. So many aspects of life depend on fossil fuels, except for music and love and education and happiness. These things, which hardly use fossil fuels, are what we must focus on.”

    A nejde o to, že na to nemáme dostatečné technologie, ty by na řešení použít šly, ale chybí nám vůle a představivost je využít. Zůstáváme při zemi, přemýšlíme až moc rezervovaně. Technologický pokrok to sám o sobě nevyřeší. Problém jsme my, ne technologické nástroje.

    Rostouci hladiny oceanu, zmena atmosferickeho proudeni, zmeny v distribuci srazek a sucha. Zmeny karbonoveho, fosforoveho a dusikoveho cyklu, okyselovani oceanu. Jake jsou bezpecnostni rizika a jake potencialni klady dramatickych zmen fungovani zemskeho systemu?
    Ale take jak funguji masove dezinformacni kampane ropneho prumyslu a boj o verejne mineni na prahu noveho klimatickeho rezimu post-holocenu.
    rozbalit záhlaví
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    YMLADRIS: The argumentation patterns of climate action preventers

    The argumentation patterns of climate action preventers - Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC)
    https://www.mcc-berlin.net/...l/article/the-argumentation-patterns-of-climate-action-preventers.html

    Too expensive, pointless, and others should do more: a new study sheds light on the excuses for doing nothing that circulate in the public debate on global warming.


    Yellow vests protests in Paris (archive picture): According to the study, the claim that climate protection would overburden the socially weak is only one of a total of twelve argumentation patterns. | Photo: Shutterstock/N. Economou

    01.07.2020


    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    YMLADRIS:

    The Dragons of Inaction: Psychological Barriers That Limit Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation

    (PDF) The Dragons of Inaction: Psychological Barriers That Limit Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
    https://www.researchgate.net/...logical_Barriers_That_Limit_Climate_Change_Mitigation_and_Adaptation

    Most people think climate change and sustainability are important problems, but too few global citizens engaged in high-greenhouse-gas-emitting behavior are engaged in enough mitigating behavior to stem the increasing flow of greenhouse gases and other environmental problems. Why is that? Structural barriers such as a climate-averse infrastructure are part of the answer, but psychological barriers also impede behavioral choices that would facilitate mitigation, adaptation, and environmental sustainability. Although many individuals are engaged in some ameliorative action, most could do more, but they are hindered by seven categories of psychological barriers, or "dragons of inaction": limited cognition about the problem, ideological worldviews that tend to preclude pro-environmental attitudes and behavior, comparisons with key other people, sunk costs and behavioral momentum, discredence toward experts and authorities, perceived risks of change, and positive but inadequate behavior change. Structural barriers must be removed wherever possible, but this is unlikely to be sufficient. Psychologists must work with other scientists, technical experts, and policymakers to help citizens overcome these psychological barriers.

    (...)

    Limited cognition Ancient brainIgnoranceEnvironmental numbnessUncertaintyJudgmental discountingOptimism biasPerceived behavioral control/self-efficacyIdeologies WorldviewsSuprahuman powersTechnosalvationSystem justificationComparisons with others Social comparisonSocial norms and networksPerceived inequitySunk costs Financial investmentsBehavioral momentumConflicting values, goals, andaspirationsDiscredence MistrustPerceived programinadequacyDenialReactancePerceived risks FunctionalPhysicalFinancialSocialPsychologicalTemporalLimited behavior TokenismRebound effect

    (sorry nechce se mi preformatovavat)
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    YMLADRIS: komentar na to od nekoho (noname clovek)

    Eric Wright I’m gonna run down each level and give my opinion on that. ty for opening up discussion
    1: seems accurate, but overlap happens in people who profess not to be conservative as well (usually deep red-blackpills such as those who subscribe to Q-anon theories and flat-earthers)
    2: accurate; examples are typically far-right pundits
    3: typical conservative thinking, the wording they may have objection to (small gov focused; gov must be small and only to serve to get out of the way of economy)
    4: mainstream independent or right-leaning ideology, can bleed into typical US or UK liberal ideology, antivaxxers have a general skepticism for science but will also accept most of this
    5: common centrist/technocratic thought, see elon musk, bill nye, neil degrasse tyson
    6: left leaning US/UK/Aus liberal thought, still technocratic but more interested in regulation and understanding capitalism has direct responsibility to climate change
    7: common climate advocacy with strong political left bias. the earliest entry point in accepting ideas more radical than theirs.
    8: cut-off point for centrist/technocratic thought to accept climate change solutions, and cut-off point for reform standards while maintaining extant governance before radical dismantling/reconstruction. First point of radical change and a useful platform to tow the line for climate advocacy
    9: radical green-pill; advocating for a complete revolution of society. entertains misanthropic and doomer tendencies, but does not fully embrace them. often anarcho-primitivist. deep exploration of anti-industrial solutions
    10: climate defeatism focused on individualist ideology conditioned from western thought, readily accepts misanthropic tendencies such as ‘humans are the virus’. Ironically can share overlap with 1: based on suspicion, distrust and paranoia. entry level for eco-fascism

    with that said, from my own expereince I’d like to offer a parallel breakdown starting at 9:
    9a: climate change is responsible for a mass extinction event, but not necessarily guaranteed extinction of all species (or even just humans alone). Does not really concern themselves with the outcome but rather what they can do within an organizational, communal and well researched capacity to effect as much solutions as possible to mitigate damage. Makes efforts to appear legitimate while working towards 10a (see Earth First!, ELF, XR)
    10a: a well organized group proactively making dramatic changes against forces that exacerbate climate change. Utilize radical militant tactics to dismantle accereration and force degrowth. Considered a terrorist threat by many governments. Often incorporating indigenous sovereignty in their tactics (see EZLN)
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    udelame anketu?

    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Europe's Leaked Hydrogen Strategy Is Very Ambitious | OilPrice.com
    https://oilprice.com/...y/Energy-General/Europes-Leaked-Hydrogen-Strategy-Is-Very-Ambitious.amp.html

    in a recent Tracking Energy Integration 2020 report, the IEA calls hydrogen one of several integration technologies that are ‘increasingly crucial’ for a low-carbon energy transition. The report notes that important political momentum had been building through last year, listing ten international initiatives and national plans that appeared during 2019. These include top level G20 discussions and target-setting plans by Korea, Japan, Netherlands, Australia and Canada.

    Clearly the hydrogen movement is at a critical moment when continuing innovation is required. The role of government will remain important as fledgling industries seek to gain scale and find markets. Governments will need to provide direct, targeted support for projects that can achieve technical and market advances. And they will need to help stimulate demand in sectors where good near-term opportunities appear.

    ...

    The shifting emphasis can be seen especially in Northern Europe, where large concentrations of projects are now found. Renewable energy will power electrolysers to produce hydrogen for industries in northern industrial centers. Other projects focus on power and heat for urban districts. Key applications include large-scale electrolysis, carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS), and utilization of natural gas networks.

    ...

    In Germany, a power-to-gas project in Emsland in the Ruhr region has been called ‘Hybridge’ for its capacity to couple electric and gas networks. In a partnership of transmission system operator Amprion and gas net operator Open Grid Europe (OGE), electricity from renewable energy will be converted, by means of electrolysis, into hydrogen and methane. The companies will deploy a 100 MW electrolyser, with the resulting hydrogen transported by an OGE hydrogen pipeline and the existing gas pipeline network throughout the Ruhr and beyond. The project is anticipated to start operation in 2023.

    In France, in the Les Hauts de France region around Dunkirk, one of the world’s most ambitious power-to-gas projects will build five 100 MW hydrogen electrolyser production units over five years. The project, a partnership of France’s H2V Industry and Norway’s HydrogenPro, will introduce hydrogen into the natural gas distribution network in order to decarbonize the natural gas used for heating and cooking as well as for transport.

    These ambitious European projects have large-scale electrolysis counterparts in North America. Most notable is a project of the British Columbia-based Renewable Hydrogen Canada (RH2C), which is backed by a private sector utility and investors. The company is planning to build a large electrolysis plant in BC, to produce renewable hydrogen through water electrolysis powered by local hydropower and winds off the Rockies.

    ...

    An enormous pilot project to convert the gas networks to hydrogen in the north of England is being planned now. First announced in 2016, the H21 North of England (H21 NoE) project, is a collaboration of two British gas distributors, Northern Gas Networks and Cadent, and Norway’s Equinor (formerly Statoil). They have produced a hydrogen blueprint that will utilize the existing natural gas distribution infrastructure serving a region of 5 million inhabitants including several large cities for domestic and industrial users, with applications including heat, power and transport.

    The project’s planners view it as a way to achieve the ‘deep decarbonization’ that could not be reached with renewable electric power alone. To do so will require carbon capture and storage (CCS). Equinor’s role is to build a hydrogen production facility utilizing a standard reforming process with natural gas. The captured CO2 will be transported offshore to undersea storage. A specially built hydrogen transmission pipeline will link to the local gas distribution networks. The new transmission pipeline is required because injecting hydrogen into gas transmission pipelines is more difficult (although Italy’s Snam has already demonstrated the feasibility of blending hydrogen up to 10% in gas transmission grids).

    Project implementation is to occur between 2028 and 2034. It is anticipated to achieve deep decarbonization of 14% of the UK's heat demand by 2034. Its large scale and significant impact on carbon emissions will make H21 NoE the world’s first at-scale hydrogen economy. Should it succeed, it will lay a basis for expanding such a system across the entire UK, decarbonizing a large percentage of domestic heat, transport and power by 2050

    TADEAS, TADEAS, TADEAS, TADEAS, TADEAS, TADEAS
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    maj plan


    This week @RepMikeLevin and I released the first comprehensive Congressional Report on #SolvingTheClimateCrisis in our nation’s history.

    We also passed legislation to ensure every American has access to affordable health care. All while wearing our masks. https://t.co/b7ieQ8vL5y


    https://climatecrisis.house.gov/report

    With the devastating consequences of climate change growing at home and abroad, the United States must harness the technological innovation of the moonshot, the creativity of our entrepreneurs, the strength of our workers, and the moral force of a nation endeavoring to establish justice for all. Solving the Climate Crisis: The Congressional Action Plan for a Clean Energy Economy and a Healthy and Just America calls on Congress to build a clean energy economy that values workers, centers environmental justice, and is prepared to meet the challenges of the climate crisis.
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Climate change could shrink vital tropical rainfall belt - Northumbria University, Newcastle
    http://newsroom.northumbria.ac.uk/...limate-change-could-shrink-vital-tropical-rainfall-belt-2973424

    A tropical rainfall belt providing critical summer rains to billions of people is at risk of shrinking due to future climate warming, according to new research.

    The resulting droughts could lead to social unrest and mass migration from affected regions, including Central America and sub-Saharan Africa.

    This stark warning comes from an international team of scientists who looked at past rainfall patterns within the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), a critical rainfall belt found near the equator.

    Seasonal shifts in the ITCZ’s location control the beginning and length of the tropical rainy season, and in turn, the agricultural growing season.

    The researchers reconstructed 1,600 years of rainfall using a stalagmite recovered from a cave in Belize, Central America, and compared this with existing rainfall data from other locations.

    The research was led by the University of New Mexico (UNM), USA, with scientists from Northumbria University and Durham University in the UK also part of the international team involved in the project.

    The researchers showed that the ITCZ expands in a cooler climate and contracts or shrinks as temperatures increase.

    As a result, areas of the northern tropics, like Central America, could experience drier conditions, leading to crop failure and possible famine. Belize is currently in a state of drought, and the research suggests that future warming will increase the likelihood and frequency of future droughts.

    Intertropical convergence zone variability in the Neotropics during the Common Era | Science Advances
    https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/7/eaax3644
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TADEAS:

    Nick Offerman

    Sacred Cow is a new book by Diana Rodgers, RD, and Robb Wolf, coming out in just a few weeks illuminating how grazing animals, raised right, are not only healthy for us to eat, but one of our best tools at mitigating climate change. The debate isn’t meat vs. plants, it’s about industrial agriculture needing to change to a more regenerative system. There’s also a companion documentary film, Sacred Cow, which portrays beautiful, regenerative agriculture in action.
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Ben See
    https://twitter.com/ClimateBen/status/1279378054549250059?s=19

    Did you know that over 90% of climate scientists think global warming will be so severe by 2038 or so that we'll hit temperatures shown to be hot enough to wreck the basic crops humanity relies upon for decent survival, or do you get your information from ad-dependent newspapers?

    90% of experts predict +2°C.

    64% project catastrophic 3-7°C by 2065-2095.
    (2009) https://amp.theguardian.com/environment/2009/apr/14/global-warming-target-2c

    New climate models show 2°C by 2038-2050.
    2020 https://theconversation.com/...atest-climate-models-suggest-it-could-be-worse-than-we-thought-137281

    2°C is catastrophic for basic crops (wheat, corn).
    2016 https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2458/why-a-half-degree-temperature-rise-is-a-big-deal/
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    maso

    Sacred Cow Trailer
    https://vimeo.com/435357655

    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    NAGASAWA: myslis jina v tom, ze bylo jiny pocasi? :]
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    TUHO: forbes to ted vydal znovu, repost z roku 2019
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    NAGASAWA: jj, je to tak, algoritmicke vrstvy mi to probublaly ted do feedu ,) ale stejne stoji za precteni myslim
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    TUHO: mihlo by zajimat tadease

    A půda potřebuje dostatek organické hmoty, což je klíčové opatření. Existuje studie Výzkumného ústavu meliorací a ochrany půdy, která říká, že i degradovanou půdu lze za tři až čtyři roky dobrou péčí zregenerovat. Je celá řada zemědělců, kteří už řádně pečují o půdu. Daleko lépe se k ní většinou chovají ti, kdo ji vlastní. Jenže v Česku na 75 procentech zemědělské půdy hospodaří někdo, komu pozemek nepatří
    NAGASAWA
    NAGASAWA --- ---
    TUHO: Jen bych dodal, ze je to článek z roku 2019 kdy byla trochu jiná situace

    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    e tenhle jeden déšť nás nespasí. Ani kdyby trval celé léto. Česko je vyprahlé a bude hůř: problémem není nedostatek srážek, ale především vzrůstající průměrná teplota. Právě její vliv v projektu InterSucho Žalud se svými kolegy s napětím sleduje. K dispozici mají bezpočet výpočtů a scénářů, ze kterých sestavují podobu budoucího Česka.

    Ta pro nás nevyznívá zrovna příznivě. Krajina kolem nejspíš získá žlutohnědý sežehlý odstín, nížiny se promění na polopouštní oblasti a v Evropě začne boj o vodu. A jak vědec připomíná, ten je daleko nebezpečnější než válka o nerostné bohatství – jde v něm o život.

    Už nás nespasí, ani kdyby pršelo celé léto. Bioklimatolog předpovídá změnu české krajiny
    https://www.forbes.cz/...si-ani-kdyby-prselo-cele-leto-bioklimatolog-predpovida-zmenu-ceske-krajiny/
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TADEAS: for the record, nejspis se pouze jenom na twitteru pohadal o rasismu a white privilege a pak si smazal ucet :))
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TADEAS: za par dnu ma franta tugle akci na stanfordu, bude i stream. smula ze se mu zrivna smazal twitter feed a zoom nahodou nepujde :D

    Oil Money Runs Deep
    https://facebook.com/events/s/oil-money-runs-deep-a-talk-wit/637664747100834/?ti=as

    In light of the renewal of the Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment’s partnership with ExxonMobil, we are pleased to invite you to a talk and Q&A on divestment and research funding by the fossil fuel industry at Princeton this Thursday, July 9, at 5 PM EST with Dr. Benjamin Franta. Franta is a JD-PhD Candidate at Stanford Law School and the Stanford Department of History, where he studies the history of climate science, climate disinformation, and fossil fuel producers.

    He has a separate PhD in applied physics from Harvard University and is a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. His writing on fossil fuel divestment and the history of the fossil fuel industry has appeared in The Guardian, The New Republic, Project Syndicate, and elsewhere.

    We will stream the event here. You can also register to join the Zoom call: bitly.com/divestfranta
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Rupert Read

    My new book, edited and with an extended postscript by Samuel Alexander.

    The anthology presents an insider’s perspective of the Extinction Rebellion movement from its inception up until the Covid pandemic, before leading to the urgent questions of strategy and framing going forward.

    Extinction Rebellion: Insights from the Inside by Rupert Read
    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/54209810-extinction-rebellion
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TADEAS: jinak jeho twitter account smazanej, proc, to nevim
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    ben franta

    The Pernicious Influence of Big Oil on America’s Universities
    https://newrepublic.com/article/158086/pernicious-influence-big-oil-americas-universities

    Stanford’s divestment debate shows how effective fossil fuel companies have been at colonizing academia.

    ...

    While divestment campaigns often focus on ethics, removing investments from fossil fuel production isn’t just ethical: It’s necessary. In 2013, the International Energy Agency estimated that to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit), global investments in fossil fuels would need to decline by $5 trillion by 2035 (about $200 billion per year, on average). In its latest Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change also found that stopping climate destruction at that level would require fossil divestment of hundreds of billions of dollars per year.

    Peer-reviewed research in top scientific journals further shows that to meet that two-degree goal—now codified in the Paris climate agreement—new fossil fuel development should cease (because even current reserves cannot all be used), and no more fossil-fueled power plants can be built unless they are retired before the end of their economically useful life (rendering them unattractive investments). A recent analysis in the top scientific journal Nature Energy found that to create an investment trajectory consistent with the Paris climate agreement, investors should increase the proportion of their energy investments in clean energy systems over time: At least half such investments should be in clean energy by 2025 and 80 percent by 2035.

    In other words: To avoid climate catastrophe, investors must move away from fossil fuels over time. Divestment isn’t an optional step: It’s a necessary condition, ideology aside. The question facing all investors—universities, pension funds, individuals, and others—is not whether to divest but rather how to do so and how quickly.

    ...

    on May 28, when it came time for Stanford’s faculty senate to discuss divestment, faculty hesitated. When I went to watch the debate, I saw professor after professor at one of America’s richest universities first declare concern about climate change, then pivot to defend Big Oil, with many pointing to their receipt of industry funding. One professor suggested society needs oil to make hand sanitizer. To state the obvious: The vast majority of fossil fuels are not used for that purpose. When I marveled over the comment later to my adviser, science historian Robert Proctor, he said he recalled a similarly bizarre argument being made in the faculty senate in 2007 to justify continued acceptance of tobacco funding: One faculty member, according to Proctor, had said we needed the cigarette industry to make vaccines. Records of that debate also show professors’ fear that if the university rejected tobacco funding, people would start to question its receipt of oil money next.

    “Funding from fossil fuels supports a lot of environmental and alternative energy research on campus,” geophysics professor Dustin Schroeder argued at the recent oil divestment meeting, as reported by The Stanford Daily. Yet fossil fuel spending on alternative energy research is comparatively minuscule: The industry spends 99 percent of its capital expenditures—over $100 billion per year—to explore for, develop, and acquire new fossil fuel reserves, despite the fact that current reserves are already more than enough to cause irreversible, catastrophic damage to life on Earth.

    ...

    Oil money runs deep at Stanford. The largest energy and climate research center on campus, the Global Climate & Energy Project, was co-founded by ExxonMobil and receives a majority of its funding from fossil fuel interests, who retain formal control over research portfolios. The university’s Precourt Institute for Energy is named after an oil and gas executive, and its Energy Modeling Forum is funded by the American Petroleum Institute, ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Schlumberger, and other fossil groups. The list goes on. These industry-funded centers, in turn, hire, provide work space for, and fund the professors and graduate students responsible for helping the world transition away from fossil fuels. If that sounds like a conflict of interest, it is.

    With decisive action, times of crisis—converging crises even more so—can be turning points. Institutions whose mission statements often explicitly cite the well-being of all of society as an ultimate goal face a moral test. Trustees making the decision should consider their legacy. Researchers receiving company money should recognize the conflict of interest. And the rest of us should examine the ties between our nation’s universities and the industry propelling the world to ruin.
    DZODZO
    DZODZO --- ---
    SHEFIK: oni chcu robit 100 mil litrov paliva, tj to bude treba asi viac ako 100 mil litrov vody ci?
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam