Slashdot Mirror
NOAA Report: World Labor Capacity Dropping Because of Increased Temperatures
pigrabbitbear writes with a story about some interesting possible effects of Global Warming. From the article: "It's a good thing that robots are stealing our jobs, because in about thirty-five years, nobody in their right mind is going to want to do them. Scientists from NOAA just published a report ... that details how a warming climate impacts the way we work, and the results are pretty clear — we do less of it. NOAA discovered that over the last 60 years, the hotter, wetter climate has decreased human labor capacity by 10%. And it projects that by 2050, that number will double."
"It's a good thing that robots are stealing our jobs, because in about thirty-five years, nobody in their right mind is going to want to do them. "
I don't want to do robots now. I mean some people in Japan might. But not me.
Global warming theoretically might cause increased competition for resources. Increased competition for resources sometimes leads to armed conflict. Armed conflict over resources sometimes results in the US getting involved militarily. The US sometimes uses drones when it is so involved.
Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that global warming definitely causes drone strikes.
Up to a limit yes.
Visit a nice tropical nation and look around vs North America or Northern Europe.
In one climate you can survive without any effort, in the other you will work or die outside in the winter.
Obviously once it gets cold enough that also impacts how much work can get done since now all energy must go into just not freezing to death.
Rebuttal: http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012/
Somebody should invent some way to cool the air down.
Moron. It's not about office workers. RTFA.
Let me know when you can aircondition a farm or construction site.
If only there was a paper explaining it~
Did you read the paper? if so please show me where it's rubbish. If not, STFU and let us adults who have read the paper talk about it, m'kay?
. One heat-stress metric with broad occupational health applications4, 5, 6 is wet-bulb globe temperature. We combine wet-bulb globe temperatures from global climate historical reanalysis7 and Earth System Model (ESM2M) projections8, 9, 10 with industrial4 and military5 guidelines for an acclimated individual’s occupational capacity to safely perform sustained labour under environmental heat stress (labour capacity)"
SO they took known data involving sustaining labour under heat stressed and applied it to the climate change.
They aren't making data up.
YOU otoh are claiming an increase in temperature does not effect production based on..what, your ass?
please, tell me, specifically, what you find wrong with the report:
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nclimate1827-s1.pdf
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Apparently the US Army disagrees, because it's their research (amoungst others') on people's ability to work under heat stress that forms the basis for the model.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Dude, the difference is SLAVERY. All large civilizations are built on the backs of slaves...
Not, they aren't; it may be PC to say so, but it's just not true. No large modern civilization was built mainly on slavery, because slavery is just not efficient and productive enough. It's risky and expensive to educate slaves, so you can't build serious industrial capacity on slavery, their mobility as a workforce is minimal, you get lots of extra expenses for security, not to mention motivation.
Even in America, where slavery was much more prevalent and lasted more than in most other world powers, the productivity of the industrialized North (based mostly on immigrant labor) was far ahead of the productivity of the slave-owning South. Look at the 1850 census, especially here http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1850c-06.pdf (table CXCV, on page 11) to see how the gross manufacturing production of non-slaveholding states dwarfs the GP of slave-holding states. Though the difference isn't as great, the agricultural production (http://www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1850c-05.pdf) AND productivity was also larger in the North.
Of course, this doesn't mean the slaves didn't contribute, or had it easy, but, if you really want America to have been build on somebody's back, that back would belong to the immigrant laborer.