Global Warming On Pace For 4 Degrees: World Bank Worried

iONiUM writes "From the article: 'Over the years at the U.N. climate talks, the goal has been to keep future global warming below 2C. But as those talks have faltered, emissions have kept rising, and that 2C goal is now looking increasingly out of reach. Lately, the conversation has shifted toward how to deal with 3C of warming. Or 4C. Or potentially more." Overall it seems that poorer, less developed nations will be largely impacted negatively, while some countries (like Canada and Russia) will actually experience benefits. Where does that leave the rest of the 1st world countries?"

Comments

Cause?

[Shagg]

What percentage of that warming comes from man-made causes?

Re:Cause?

[thesupraman]

Did you just cut and paste that off your favorite pundits blog? Perhaps you should go and learn some actual facts.

None of the models has yet managed to predict, in fact they tend to be wildly off, and generally hide behind claims of 'weather is not climate' and yet expect their long term predictions to be accurate when their 1-5 year predictions have been wildly inaccurate (no one is asking them for week or month scale predictions, THAT is weather..). They are trying to predict chaotic systems with massive feedback, small inaccuracies amplify over time, not the opposite.

And we are not talking about a 3-4% increase in atmospheric carbon, learn to read, total human output is 3-4% of the yearly output of carbon, that is what the carbon cycle is about! Global atmospheric CO2 levels are highly cyclic, and have been above the current level many many times before, and have also fallen many many times before - as ecosystems ADJUST, funny how log lasting natural systems tend to be highly resilient and self-adjusting...

As there are about 70 nuclear reactors (all old bad designs) in the US, we could replace all of those in much less than 2 years by your 'one a week' BS, nuclear is of course only 20% of US power generation (although 80% in france for example, where rampant over consumption of energy is not as endemic), but at one a week, you would have replaced the total US power generation infrastructure in around 7-8 years, even the US power consumption is not growing THAT fast (in fact dropped 5% from 2004 to 2010, but again dont let facts get in the way of your stupidity)..

I notice you ignore the statements about real pollution and rampant waste, I guess you like YOUR BS lifestyle, and just think money and governments are just going to magic the problems away if you put some fashionable bumper stickers on, and bake cookies for some nice rallies, hmmm?

Re:Quick...

[cayenne8]

I thought I'd heard the other day on the radio, that the world had actually seemed to have stopped warming a few years ago, and had been actually holding steady on average?

Devil's Advocate

[BlackusDiamondus]

I'm probably going to modded into oblivion, but I'm sorry I simply don't buy what this article by the World Bank is selling Temperatures have remained steady for 16 years now in spite of computer models released by the IPCC which show that by now temperatures should be much higher. So there's likely a negative feedback effect that has been left undocumented by most models, and this should be concerning many people in the climate science game. Honestly, this articles smacks of an attempt by the World Bank to scare people into getting on board an ETS - from which they will directly benefit in a financial manner. I really wish that anyone outside of the sphere of science would stop making unfounded claims to push their own agendas.

Re:The temps go higher, time-frame lower every yea

[Samantha Wright]

So you're saying you're inclined to disregard all claims of danger without examining the reasons behind them? Or does that only apply to the thought that the world you grew up in may one day change?

Re:Quick...

[cayenne8]

Oh, well, it must be true if it was on the radio. The radio only ever has well researched, peer-reviewed content.

No...just said I'd heard it the other day while driving in...and no, it wasn't Rush or anyone like that...I don't even know if he's on the air down here.

Just was hoping someone might have links one way or the other on it.

Me personally? I don't really care....

By the time the world explodes or dies or has a real problem with global warming, I'll be long dead and in the ground with no one to remember who I was or curse my name.

Therefore, I'm gonna have all the fun I can with the fun things hydrocarbons can do...hell, right now I'm trying to buy a big block (455) 70's muscle car, and yes, even with 10mpg, It'll be a daily driver (I live fairly close to work)....

Aside from that, I don't really go out of my way to pollute, but I certainly don't go out of my way with any effort to conserve or recycle or anything....I'm here a short time on earth, so live for today, and enjoy my time here to the fullest is pretty much my motto.