U.S. Is Seen as Laggard as Russia Asserts Itself in Warming Arctic (1 Viewer)

[cstu]

KP, I think your question was quite reasonable. I asked my mom's friend from NASA (the one in charge of the comet program) nearly that same question a few years ago, and she told me that by the time we are able to notice results of climate change that affect our everyday lives in a negative fashion, it will be far too late to do anything about it.

Next time you talk to her, please ask her about the logarithmic effect of CO2. If I'm wrong I want to know.

 

[McGarnicle]

Two positives of global warming:

1. If it really is happening, realistically there's nothing we can do about it anyway and deep down everybody knows it.

2. We'll all be dead by the time the S really H's T F.

 

[cstu]

Two positives of global warming:

1. If it really is happening, realistically there's nothing we can do about it anyway and deep down everybody knows it.

2. We'll all be dead by the time the S really H's T F.

Reactions like this is my biggest issue with alarmists. We can do something about it if we have a long timeline. However, the alarmists act like we're already out of time which makes the average person think like you do and

 

[McGarnicle]

Two positives of global warming:

1. If it really is happening, realistically there's nothing we can do about it anyway and deep down everybody knows it.

2. We'll all be dead by the time the S really H's T F.

Reactions like this is my biggest issue with alarmists. We can do something about it if we have a long timeline. However, the alarmists act like we're already out of time which makes the average person think like you do and

The good news is eventually we'll run out of fossil fuels. Until then, the people in charge are more concerned with getting reelected than with imposing unpopular policies that will punish business, cause inconvenience, etc. Face it, we all know humans are too short-sighted and selfish to do anything about this while things still appear to be just peachy. And hell, people still actually deny the science.

 

[timschochet]

KP, I think your question was quite reasonable. I asked my mom's friend from NASA (the one in charge of the comet program) nearly that same question a few years ago, and she told me that by the time we are able to notice results of climate change that affect our everyday lives in a negative fashion, it will be far too late to do anything about it.

Next time you talk to her, please ask her about the logarithmic effect of CO2. If I'm wrong I want to know.

After my mom passed I never see her. Which is too bad; she's a fascinating woman.

 

[timschochet]

Two positives of global warming:

1. If it really is happening, realistically there's nothing we can do about it anyway and deep down everybody knows it.

2. We'll all be dead by the time the S really H's T F.

#### dude if this is positive for you what is negative?

 

[McGarnicle]

Two positives of global warming:

1. If it really is happening, realistically there's nothing we can do about it anyway and deep down everybody knows it.

2. We'll all be dead by the time the S really H's T F.

#### dude if this is positive for you what is negative?

As usual I'm being facetious but that really highlights why I don't take these issues, or politics, seriously. We've talked about this before. I'm really pessimistic when it comes to believing in the human race to act for the greater good. And I know it grates on people like you who do care, and do believe that it matters who we vote for, but I really don't care anymore. It's too depressing to care imo.

 

[jon_mx]

Global economic growth picked up pace slightly to 3.3% in 2014, according to the IMF, while the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere remained at 2013 levels of 32.3 billion tonnes.

"This is both a very welcome surprise and a significant one," said IEA chief economist Fatih Birol. "For the first time, greenhouse gas emissions are decoupling from economic growth," he said.

The halt in emissions growth reflected changing patterns of energy consumption in China, including using less coal. The world's biggest polluter also relied more heavily on renewable sources, such as hydropower, solar and wind to generate electricity.

The funny thing is in their mention of China, there is no mention of the rapid growth of nuclear power which will more than double over the next few years. This is all good and helped reduce the growth of new coal powered plants in China, but China is still opening about 1 new coal plant every week and is still by far their biggest source of existing and new power.

 

[jon_mx]

Two positives of global warming:

1. If it really is happening, realistically there's nothing we can do about it anyway and deep down everybody knows it.

2. We'll all be dead by the time the S really H's T F.

#### dude if this is positive for you what is negative?

As usual I'm being facetious but that really highlights why I don't take these issues, or politics, seriously. We've talked about this before. I'm really pessimistic when it comes to believing in the human race to act for the greater good. And I know it grates on people like you who do care, and do believe that it matters who we vote for, but I really don't care anymore. It's too depressing to care imo.

Not one of the solutions and actions being proposed by any of the politicians will make a hill of beans difference. Yeah, it makes Tim feel better that 'something' is done, but it is like proposing throwing up a few sandbags to stop Katrina.

 

[cstu]

Not one of the solutions and actions being proposed by any of the politicians will make a hill of beans difference. Yeah, it makes Tim feel better that 'something' is done, but it is like proposing throwing up a few sandbags to stop Katrina.

I disagree - continued research into renewable technology will solve the problem. In 100 years we will be using relatively little fossil fuels and the world will be just fine (maybe 1 degree Celsius warmer).

 

[jon_mx]

Not one of the solutions and actions being proposed by any of the politicians will make a hill of beans difference. Yeah, it makes Tim feel better that 'something' is done, but it is like proposing throwing up a few sandbags to stop Katrina.

I disagree - continued research into renewable technology will solve the problem. In 100 years we will be using relatively little fossil fuels and the world will be just fine (maybe 1 degree Celsius warmer).

But who is proposing to stop researching renewables. That is going to occur with whoever is in office. The policies I am talking about which differentiates the parties are things like cap and trade and EPA regulations which will just serve to push companies abroad.

 

[cstu]

Not one of the solutions and actions being proposed by any of the politicians will make a hill of beans difference. Yeah, it makes Tim feel better that 'something' is done, but it is like proposing throwing up a few sandbags to stop Katrina.

I disagree - continued research into renewable technology will solve the problem. In 100 years we will be using relatively little fossil fuels and the world will be just fine (maybe 1 degree Celsius warmer).

But who is proposing to stop researching renewables. That is going to occur with whoever is in office

That's simply not true. Bush didn't do any of this.

 

[jon_mx]

Not one of the solutions and actions being proposed by any of the politicians will make a hill of beans difference. Yeah, it makes Tim feel better that 'something' is done, but it is like proposing throwing up a few sandbags to stop Katrina.

I disagree - continued research into renewable technology will solve the problem. In 100 years we will be using relatively little fossil fuels and the world will be just fine (maybe 1 degree Celsius warmer).

But who is proposing to stop researching renewables. That is going to occur with whoever is in office

That's simply not true. Bush didn't do any of this.

Nothing in there is going to make any significant difference on the scheme of global climate. It is stuff that makes their base feel good. And that had almost nothing to do with research into renewables.

 

[Johnny Rock]

Enough of the :hijack: Can the global warming discussion be taken to its own thread?

A few people in here are interested in the real topic of Russia trying to stake a claim to the Arctic and the U.S. seemingly standing idly by.

 

[McGarnicle]

I'm so pissed that Russia is trying to stake a claim to the Arctic while the U.S. seemingly stands idly by.

 

[jon_mx]

I'm so pissed that Russia is trying to stake a claim to the Arctic while the U.S. seemingly stands idly by.

Absolutely. What if one of the next 44 presidents would like to visit the artic circle. Obama just thinks about himself!

 

[DrJ]

So where does this leave Santa?

 

[Rove!]

So where does this leave Santa?

Making plans to add a swimming pool to his North Pole home....

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Russians are a bunch of dicks, glad you guys are finally finding this out.

 

[beer 30]

Canada will protect us, no need to fret.

So Canada is still a thing huh? Who knew

 

[Chadstroma]

Enough of the :hijack: Can the global warming discussion be taken to its own thread?

A few people in here are interested in the real topic of Russia trying to stake a claim to the Arctic and the U.S. seemingly standing idly by.

I should have known better but I thought the article was about the political, economic, military and international relations implications of a warming artic. The opportunities missed or gained.

 

[Chadstroma]

We have two world powers in Russia and China that are doing very similar things. Both are trying to grab exclusive economic zones, Russia in the artic and China in the South China Sea. It does not appear we have a strategy or doing much with Russia in the artic. For China, we have been building stronger military relationships with some of the affected nations such as the Philippines (though a long time regional ally in Thailand looks to be drifting away from us and getting cozy with China). Beyond that, our strategy seems to protest every time China expands and actively strengthens it's claims. These are things that the typical American knows much about or cares to know about but they do have real national interest implications for us.

 

[32 Counter Pass]

If we want to save the planet from climate change we're going to have to rely on other countries like Russia and China to do it. Because so long as we have conservatives in control of our House of Representatives, we'll always refuse to accept reality and scientific evidence. We're ####ed.

Global Warming isn't as big of a deal as you think. You're taking an extreme stance on it right now. The earth has cycles of weather. You can't just look back 100 years and say oh its so much hotter now than then. You have to look back thousands of years even millions and you can see there is a pattern that the earth has almost like seasons. Just chill out and relax the Earth will be just fine as you live on it and 500 years after you are gone unless there is a nuclear war and then everything goes to ####.

I think you're right. For my own stress level, I need to stop listening to scientists who have devoted their lives' work to this issue, and instead follow the advice of regular joes on the Internet.

Okay you do that,listen to scientist spitting propaganda to alter the way you think and spend money. Its the same scientist that were spitting propaganda in the 60's and 70's saying we are changing the global temps to freezing cold. If you haven't learned yet usually where the crowd goes and follows, is usually wrong. There is many examples but you're probably to ignorant to listen so why even bother. Have a good day

God, there is so much ignorance in this post I do not know where to begin. I believe you are implying that the science behind climate change is economically motivated. Please provide examples of scientists "cashing in" on these findings. Also, please show where "the SAME scientist that were spitting propaganda in the 60's and 70's saying we are changing the global temps to freezing cold." BTW, I note you used the word scientist instead of scientists. Is that intentional?

Absurd.

 

[Chadstroma]

For the first time, the US Coast Guard sends its unmanned Icebreaker ship to the North Pole
by Richard WilliamsonSeptember 10, 2015

For the first time, an icebreaker ship from the US Coast Guard has set sail to the North Pole, all on its own, becoming the first among American surface ships to access the top of the world all by itself, stated the officials on Tuesday. Healy, the US Guard Cutter is originally based in Seattle and reached the Pole on 5 September, says the Coast Guard in their statement.

With the polar ice melting rapidly, there has been enhanced activity in this inhospitable region. Many nations are now eyeing new sources of viable gas and oil deposits, minerals and shipping routes such as the Northwest Passage.


Interestingly, no one has so far claimed ownership over the North Pole. But, this could change soon. In another statement, the Coast Guard says that with the Arctic region continuing to open itself up for new development, the data that Healy will gather on board during the present cruise will become even more critical in understanding how scientific processes work in the Arctic and how stewardship can be exercised most responsibly in the region.

At present, the United States has three icebreakers, though only two are presently operational.

President Barrack Obama stated last week that he would accelerate the construction of another icebreaker which is vital to project US power in the Arctic which is being contested increasingly.

The voyage of Healy also marks the 4th time a surface vessel of the US is reaching the North Pole and the first time it does so unaccompanied. Routinely, submarines travel under Arctic icepack and at times surface at the Pole.

The Healy is a 128 meters long weighing 16,000 tons. The engine is 30,000HP and can break the ice over 10 feet.

The passengers and crew of the ship comprise of 145 people, and that includes scientists studying geochemistry of global oceans.

Meantime, shipping companies have already started exploring the new route that has been presented by the melting ice. China was by far the first to explore the new route and saved some 15 days voyage in reaching Netherlands. Other shipping lines followed and by 2013 the traffic grew to 71 ships per year. However, a slowdown in the subsequent years saw traffic coming down to 53 ships per year.

http://www.thetimesgazette.com/for-the-first-time-the-us-coast-guard-sends-its-unmanned-icebreaker-ship-to-the-north-pole/7352/

 

[McGarnicle]

At present, the United States has three icebreakers

"Sure is cold up here, right? Buy you a drink?""Whoa, look at the size of that penguin! Anyone sitting here?"

"Those nipples look like they want to bust right out of that sweater! Hi, I'm Brad."