• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    TUHOKlimaticka zmena / Thank you so much for ruining my day
    SHEFIK
    SHEFIK --- ---
    SHEFIK
    SHEFIK --- ---
    Cutting Emissions To Zero CAN Halt Climate Change In Our Lifetimes
    https://cleantechnica.com/.../15/cutting-emissions-to-zero-can-halt-climate-change-in-our-lifetimes/

    “There’s no point in stopping climate change,” an acquaintance once told me. “Even if we changed everything to electric and solar panels, your scientists are saying it wouldn’t even help our grandchildren’s grandchildren much.”

    That view may sound defeatist, but until recently, that was the prevailing scientific view. My acquaintance was actually right. “Our” scientists were saying something like that. On the NASA climate change frequently asked questions pages, under “Is it too late to prevent climate change?” it says, “Even if we stopped emitting greenhouse gases today, global warming would continue to happen for at least several more decades, if not centuries. That’s because it takes a while for the planet (for example, the oceans) to respond, and because carbon dioxide – the predominant heat-trapping gas – lingers in the atmosphere for hundreds of years.”

    That data led to a lot of hopelessness, and even served as an excuse for people who don’t want to sacrifice anything to mitigate the effects of climate change. Fortunately, some climate scientists are finding that their past assumptions on this question were wrong.

    Buried under doomsday predictions for what could happen during a second Trump term was newer information about this from Michael Mann, a distinguished climate scientist. It turns out that if we cut to zero emissions, the warming would continue, but only for a few years.

    nebudu kopirovat cely :)
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Joe Biden's climate pledges: Are they realistic?
    https://dw.com/en/joe-bidens-climate-pledges-are-they-realistic/a-56173821

    What can Biden do domestically during his term?
    With 2050 a long way off, all eyes are on what the president-elect does at home in the next few years.

    Key among his domestic climate pledges is his plan to make the US power sector climate neutral by 2035. Bertram said "this is something where there could be visible results within three to four years [in Biden's term]."

    In addition to the power sector, Keohane says the EDF has identified two other key short-term goals for Biden's domestic policy: Transportation, particularly with legislation around tailpipe standards for cars and trucks, and methane reduction in industry.

    "The federal government needs to go all out on existing authorities like the Clean Air Act," Keohane said. "Methane is the main cause of near-term warming, and reducing that is something Biden can do from day one."

    In the US, the oil and gas industries were responsible for 31% of methane production in the US between 1990 and 2017 according to the Environmental Protection Agency , second only to agriculture. Investing in clean energy sources and creating a transition away from these industries will be important in reducing methane emissions in the next few years.
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TADEAS:

    Top scientists warn of 'ghastly future of mass extinction' and climate disruption | Environment | The Guardian
    https://amp.theguardian.com/...-warn-of-ghastly-future-of-mass-extinction-and-climate-disruption-aoe

    “The scale of the threats to the biosphere and all its lifeforms – including humanity – is in fact so great that it is difficult to grasp for even well-informed experts,” they write in a report in Frontiers in Conservation Science which references more than 150 studies detailing the world’s major environmental challenges.

    The delay between destruction of the natural world and the impacts of these actions means people do not recognise how vast the problem is, the paper argues. “[The] mainstream is having difficulty grasping the magnitude of this loss, despite the steady erosion of the fabric of human civilisation.”

    The report warns that climate-induced mass migrations, more pandemics and conflicts over resources will be inevitable unless urgent action is taken.

    “Ours is not a call to surrender – we aim to provide leaders with a realistic ‘cold shower’ of the state of the planet that is essential for planning to avoid a ghastly future,” it adds.
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TADEAS:

    Simultaneous with population growth, humanity's consumption as a fraction of Earth's regenerative capacity has grown from ~ 73% in 1960 to 170% in 2016 (Lin et al., 2018), with substantially greater per-person consumption in countries with highest income. With COVID-19, this overshoot dropped to 56% above Earth's regenerative capacity, which means that between January and August 2020, humanity consumed as much as Earth can renew in the entire year (overshootday.org). While inequality among people and countries remains staggering, the global middle class has grown rapidly and exceeded half the human population by 2018 (Kharas and Hamel, 2018). Over 70% of all people currently live in countries that run a biocapacity deficit while also having less than world-average income, excluding them from compensating their biocapacity deficit through purchases (Wackernagel et al., 2019) and eroding future resilience via reduced food security (Ehrlich and Harte, 2015b). The consumption rates of high-income countries continue to be substantially higher than low-income countries, with many of the latter even experiencing declines in per-capita footprint (Dasgupta and Ehrlich, 2013; Wackernagel et al., 2019).
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Frontiers | Underestimating the Challenges of Avoiding a Ghastly Future | Conservation Science
    https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2020.615419/full

    We report three major and confronting environmental issues that have received little attention and require urgent action.

    First, we review the evidence that future environmental conditions will be far more dangerous than currently believed. The scale of the threats to the biosphere and all its lifeforms—including humanity—is in fact so great that it is difficult to grasp for even well-informed experts.

    Second, we ask what political or economic system, or leadership, is prepared to handle the predicted disasters, or even capable of such action.

    Third, this dire situation places an extraordinary responsibility on scientists to speak out candidly and accurately when engaging with government, business, and the public.

    We especially draw attention to the lack of appreciation of the enormous challenges to creating a sustainable future. The added stresses to human health, wealth, and well-being will perversely diminish our political capacity to mitigate the erosion of ecosystem services on which society depends.

    The science underlying these issues is strong, but awareness is weak. Without fully appreciating and broadcasting the scale of the problems and the enormity of the solutions required, society will fail to achieve even modest sustainability goals.
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    Insects face ‘death by a thousand cuts’

    In the introduction to a special issue of PNAS that throws light on insect decline, ecologists do not mince words: “Nature is under siege,” they write. “Most biologists agree that the world has entered its sixth mass extinction event.” In a bid to provide a scientifically grounded assessment of insect population trends, the journal offers 11 papers that delve into every aspect of the issue.

    One of the challenges is going beyond “the overwhelming sense that something sinister is afoot” and gathering clear, comprehensive data on insect abundances over time. There are only a handful of long-term monitoring studies of insect populations. So entomologists have turned to plumbing other historical data for signals of change.

    PNAS special issue introduction | 30 min read & PNAS feature | 15 min read
    Insect decline in the Anthropocene: Death by a thousand cuts | PNAS
    https://www.pnas.org/content/118/2/e2023989118
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Do we only have 60 harvests left? - Our World in Data
    https://ourworldindata.org/soil-lifespans

    Let’s focus on the ‘conventionally managed’ soils, shown in blue. These data are relevant for understanding many of the world’s farming practices. We will look at conservation techniques later.

    Many of these soils are thinning; some very quickly. 16% have a lifespan of less than 100 years if they continue to erode at their current rates. This is not a local problem: there are examples of soils with lifespans shorter than a century on all continents, including the United States, Australia, Spain, Italy, Brazil and China. The longevity of these soils is concerning and we should be acting quickly to preserve them.

    But the “60 harvests” claim is quite clearly false. More than 90% of conventionally managed soils had a ‘lifespan’ greater than 60 years. The median was 491 years for thinning soils. Half had a lifespan greater than 1,000 years, and 18% exceeded 10,000 years. There were also some soils that were not eroding at all. Where soil formation rates exceeded erosion rates, soils thickened.In fact, some were thickening – soil was forming quicker than it was eroding. In the bottom-right of the chart we see the rates of soil gain. 7% of conventionally managed soils were thickening.

    If we were to keep our land completely bare – by removing any vegetation and preventing any natural regrowth through pesticides – our soils could erode more quickly. One-third (34%) of bare soils had lifespans less than 100 years.

    There is no single figure for how many harvests the world has left because there is so much variation in the types, quality, and management of our soils. It’s just implausible that they would all be degrading at exactly the same rate. As these results show: some soils are eroding quickly while others are thickening

    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    The climate outsider tackling Britain’s global warming mission – POLITICO
    https://www.politico.eu/article/the-climate-outsider-tackling-britains-global-climate-mission/amp/

    “This is a very different COP. This is not a negotiating COP,” said Christiana Figueres, the former head of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.

    Rather than presiding over tortured debates on new international law, Sharma’s goal is to convince every country on earth to set a date for reaching net zero emissions, plus new climate targets for 2030. Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, they aren’t officially due to update their plans until 2025, but after scientists in 2018 produced evidence of the serious consequences of warming even 1.5 degrees — the world is already around 1.2 degrees hotter — many governments decided climate change was outpacing that time frame.

    An update was planned for last November, but the COP26 was shifted to this year thanks to the pandemic.
    PER2
    PER2 --- ---
    trosku o vodiku:
    Decoding the Hype Behind the Natural Gas Industry’s Hydrogen Push | DeSmog
    https://www.desmogblog.com/2021/01/14/decoding-hype-behind-natural-gas-industry-hydrogen-push
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    How close are we to the temperature tipping point of the terrestrial biosphere? | Science Advances
    https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/3/eaay1052.full

    "The temperature tipping point of the terrestrial biosphere lies not at the end of the century or beyond, but within the next 20 to 30 years (Figs. 2 and 3, A to D). Given the temperature limits of land carbon uptake presented here, without mitigating warming, we will cross the temperature threshold of the most productive biomes by midcentury, after which the land sink will degrade to only ~50% of current capacity if adaptation does not occur. While biomes will eventually shift spatially in response to warming, this process is unlikely to be a smooth migration, but rather a rapid disturbance-driven loss of present biomes (with additional emissions of carbon to the atmosphere), followed by a slower establishment of biomes more suited to the emerging climate. Furthermore, the establishment of new biomes is unlikely to be complete without human intervention and will be limited by edaphic factors, especially nutrient availability. This further suggests that we are rapidly entering temperature regimes where biosphere productivity will precipitously decline."
    SHEFIK
    SHEFIK --- ---
    TUHO: tyhle tezit nebudou, tak by to melo bejt dobry

    V Krkonoších loni vysázeli 39 000 stromků, většinou listnáče - Ekolist.cz
    https://ekolist.cz/...ravodajstvi/zpravy/v-krkonosich-loni-vysazeli-39.000-stromku-vetsinou-listnace
    KEB
    KEB --- ---
    LINKOS: mně to neříkej, já jen doufám, že to ví ti správní v EU, protože zatím to tak nevypadá. počkáme si co vypadne z toho green zákona co chtějí schvalovat.
    LINKOS
    LINKOS --- ---
    KEB: tak samozřejmě, že nemůžem nahradit uhlí dřevem a provozovat ty samé elektrárny dal. Limit našich ekosystémů nás omezuje, nejsme to ohromné kvantum energie takhle produkovat, mužem mít jen malé elektrárny co budou třeba vyrábět teplo a elektřinu z místních zdrojů, co nám ekosystém dovolí a třeba jen v zimě. Proto potřebujem jednak snížit náročnost našich domu, našeho průmyslu a toto snížené množství energie produkovat skrze oze
    KEB
    KEB --- ---
    LINKOS: tohle neuvěřitelný kvantum dřeva IMHO nejde produkovat udržitelným způsobem.
    LINKOS
    LINKOS --- ---
    KEB: proto jsem říkal, že by EU měla vyžadovat certifikaci původu dřeva. Samozřejmě, že uhlobaroni co mají elektrárny na uhlí, je budou chtít používat dál a dávat tam štěpky. Dává to smysl, pokud sme schopni to dřevo produkovat, nedává to smysl, pokud to musíme vozit deštného pralesa, což platí ale i o té sóje.
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    České lesy se staly významným emitentem skleníkových plynů. Připadá vám to divné, když planetu mají od globálního oteplení zachránit právě lesy, které by pohltily CO2 z průmyslových zdrojů? Tak ale vězte, že takový mechanismus funguje jen dočasně. Dokud lesy přirůstají, skutečně CO2 využívají k fotosyntéze a růstu dřeva. Pokud však růst přestanou, a jsou vytěženy a zpracovány, stanou se vlastně zdrojem CO2 do ovzduší, protože většina dřeva je rychle zase spotřebována a CO2 uvolněn.

    Jakub Hruška: České lesy se staly významným emitentem skleníkových plynů - Ekolist.cz
    https://ekolist.cz/...ntare/jakubn-hruska-ceske-lesy-se-staly-vyznamnym-emitentem-sklenikovych-plynu
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam