Global Warming | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Global Warming

Coming to a state with the most AFL clubs soon ... New Zealand a little more advanced with rebuking all oil and gas and massive increase in sovereign risk.

I think a good example that as the cost of energy skyrockets with a poorly managed transition we will see all sorts of public services impacted as budgets get hammered.


That the main consumer of gas in NZ is shutting its plant to sell the gas it has (to electricity production) as that is more profitable is pretty telling.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Coming to a state with the most AFL clubs soon ... New Zealand a little more advanced with rebuking all oil and gas and massive increase in sovereign risk.

I think a good example that as the cost of energy skyrockets with a poorly managed transition we will see all sorts of public services impacted as budgets get hammered.


That the main consumer of gas in NZ is shutting its plant to sell the gas it has (to electricity production) as that is more profitable is pretty telling.

Them Kiwis simply need to smarten up a bit. They've got a hundred trillion billion sheepses running around the place.
Dried sheepses pellets for heating n cooking fuel.
Sheepses tallow candles for lighting.
Dead sheepses skin coats n shoes ( ugg jackets n boots) n live sheepses fur for wooly undies for outdoors winter warmness.

Problems solved in five minutes without even a quiet beer or two to cogitate over. Pull the finger out Kiwis n save the world.
 
  • Love
Reactions: 1 users
Them Kiwis simply need to smarten up a bit. They've got a hundred trillion billion sheepses running around the place.
Dried sheepses pellets for heating n cooking fuel.
Sheepses tallow candles for lighting.
Dead sheepses skin coats n shoes ( ugg jackets n boots) n live sheepses fur for wooly undies for outdoors winter warmness.

Problems solved in five minutes without even a quiet beer or two to cogitate over. Pull the finger out Kiwis n save the world.
I’m not sure the Kiwis want family members put through all that.
Them Kiwis simply need to smarten up a bit. They've got a hundred trillion billion sheepses running around the place.
Dried sheepses pellets for heating n cooking fuel.
Sheepses tallow candles for lighting.
Dead sheepses skin coats n shoes ( ugg jackets n boots) n live sheepses fur for wooly undies for outdoors winter warmness.

Problems solved in five minutes without even a quiet beer or two to cogitate over. Pull the finger out Kiwis n save the world.
and now they’re stockpiling coal to keep the lights on. :giggle:
 
Coming to a state with the most AFL clubs soon ... New Zealand a little more advanced with rebuking all oil and gas and massive increase in sovereign risk.

I think a good example that as the cost of energy skyrockets with a poorly managed transition we will see all sorts of public services impacted as budgets get hammered.


That the main consumer of gas in NZ is shutting its plant to sell the gas it has (to electricity production) as that is more profitable is pretty telling.

With respect RE the sovereign risk thing is a bit of a furphy on a number of levels. very broadly, the risks of inaction are greater than any perceived dent to conservative un-reconstructed economic credentials from "sovereign risk", which in this case actually means allowing large corporations to do whatever they want regardless of the consequences. And also developed nations jump at the sovereign risk shadow, when there are far greater risks, actual sovereign risks, (corruption, threat of nationalisation, poor infrastructure, untrained workforce etc), of doing business in an undeveloped nation.

The 'sovereign risk' call is code for 'how dare you not let us have it our own way and not subsidise us while we're doing it'.

The Queensland government got whacked with the SR stick when they increased the coal royalty by 300%. But after the state economy boomed and the public could see the benefits, the QMC pulled their head in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I’m not sure the Kiwis want family members put through all that.

and now they’re stockpiling coal to keep the lights on. :giggle:
Not sure why them South Pacific Poms would want to save up all their coal for, instead of using it. We've got *smile* loads of coal we'd be happy to sell them on the cheap instead of using it ourselves. Perhaps we could even get some kind of barter system happening so it wouldn't even cost them much. Swap some coal for tasty lamb chops, lamb roast n some toasty warm jackets. Win win for both mobs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
With respect RE the sovereign risk thing is a bit of a furphy on a number of levels. very broadly, the risks of inaction are greater than any perceived dent to conservative un-reconstructed economic credentials from "sovereign risk", which in this case actually means allowing large corporations to do whatever they want regardless of the consequences. And also developed nations jump at the sovereign risk shadow, when there are far greater risks, actual sovereign risks, (corruption, threat of nationalisation, poor infrastructure, untrained workforce etc), of doing business in an undeveloped nation.

The 'sovereign risk' call is code for 'how dare you not let us have it our own way and not subsidise us while we're doing it'.

The Queensland government got whacked with the SR stick when they increased the coal royalty by 300%. But after the state economy boomed and the public could see the benefits, the QMC pulled their head in.

Not sure I deserve any respect :)

Whatever it should be called, it cools the appetite for investment as it makes the returns less predictable, so capital will hunt for areas where it can get the best return. If the returns are massive already, then clearly there is scope to increase the royalties in spite of any bleating that takes place. The sovereign risk in Aus / NZ wrt gas is probably threat of price control (has happened), the power of activist groups to disrupt plans (has happened) and the power of governments to ban exploration/development (has happened). I guess we will see if this gets reigned in if energy security gets threatened like it is in NZ.

No doubt there are very different and real risks in whichever country you operate in that all demand their own premium to attract investment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Not sure I deserve any respect :)

Whatever it should be called, it cools the appetite for investment as it makes the returns less predictable, so capital will hunt for areas where it can get the best return. If the returns are massive already, then clearly there is scope to increase the royalties in spite of any bleating that takes place. The sovereign risk in Aus / NZ wrt gas is probably threat of price control (has happened), the power of activist groups to disrupt plans (has happened) and the power of governments to ban exploration/development (has happened). I guess we will see if this gets reigned in if energy security gets threatened like it is in NZ.

No doubt there are very different and real risks in whichever country you operate in that all demand their own premium to attract investment.
I think you'll find activist groups disrupting fossil fuel development plans, in terms of stopping a project, has not happened. Projects have been shelved due to economics, eg Browse Basin, opposition on ecological or CH grounds may have been a contributing factor, but the final decision, at least to date, has always been about economic viability.

This is generally true globally, with a couple of exceptions. Greenie opposition has been a significant contributing factor to whether a project lives or dies, kind of like a straw that breaks the camels back, but in the vast majority of cases its the profitability that is the bottom line.

The Mining Industry's own survey in its own publication has Aus, US and CAN states and provinces making up the whole top 10 in its 'best places to do business' survey. It happens every couple of years, WA, QLD and NT are always up there, in spite of the endless whinging about approvals and royalties.

Edit: Now I think about it, those 'couple of exceptions' were copper or lithium, (and they are lying dormant and could be resurected anyway), not fossil fuels. I'm not aware of any FF projects that have been stopped due to unacceptable environmental impacts.

As I always say RE, its about the proven reserve. The minerals. The grade, the size, the proximity to port. Thats what its all about. Mining and petro companies can whine and sook and say they will take their business elsewhere, but they can't. Where will they go? Sudan? China? Canada (same regs as us)? They can't just magic a viable copper, or whatever deposit out of thin air.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Not sure why them South Pacific Poms would want to save up all their coal for, instead of using it. We've got *smile* loads of coal we'd be happy to sell them on the cheap instead of using it ourselves. Perhaps we could even get some kind of barter system happening so it wouldn't even cost them much. Swap some coal for tasty lamb chops, lamb roast n some toasty warm jackets. Win win for both mobs.
I can recommend the products (y)
 
I can recommend the products (y)
I've heard that the old dead possum turns into premium quality knitwear. Kiwis happy to turn them into jumpers n socks n stuff. There's another thing that we should be making use of over here. Bloody manky old hairy possums roaming around n climbing into roofs n making heaps of noise rummaging around. Stuff trying to run the furry little buggers over n just turning them into roadkill for the crows. Turn them into fluffy socks n nice warm beige cardy's, there's plenty of them roaming around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I think you'll find activist groups disrupting fossil fuel development plans, in terms of stopping a project, has not happened. Projects have been shelved due to economics, eg Browse Basin, opposition on ecological or CH grounds may have been a contributing factor, but the final decision, at least to date, has always been about economic viability.

This is generally true globally, with a couple of exceptions. Greenie opposition has been a significant contributing factor to whether a project lives or dies, kind of like a straw that breaks the camels back, but in the vast majority of cases its the profitability that is the bottom line.

The Mining Industry's own survey in its own publication has Aus, US and CAN states and provinces making up the whole top 10 in its 'best places to do business' survey. It happens every couple of years, WA, QLD and NT are always up there, in spite of the endless whinging about approvals and royalties.

Edit: Now I think about it, those 'couple of exceptions' were copper or lithium, (and they are lying dormant and could be resurected anyway), not fossil fuels. I'm not aware of any FF projects that have been stopped due to unacceptable environmental impacts.

As I always say RE, its about the proven reserve. The minerals. The grade, the size, the proximity to port. Thats what its all about. Mining and petro companies can whine and sook and say they will take their business elsewhere, but they can't. Where will they go? Sudan? China? Canada (same regs as us)? They can't just magic a viable copper, or whatever deposit out of thin air.

Yep if something is a banger it’s a banger.

I can promise you that stuff that is marginal gets impacted by this stuff.

Let’s see how nz goes for gas now it has reversed its ban. Once you lose scale it’s expensive to get it back.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We should have better answers by now’: climate scientists baffled by unexpected pace of heating


The leap in temperatures over the past 13 months has exceeded the global heating forecasts – is this just a blip or a systemic shift?

22:00 AEST Thursday, 15 August 2024


In a remarkably candid essay in the journal Nature this March, one of the world’s top climate scientists posited the alarming possibility that global heating may be moving beyond the ability of experts to predict what happens next.

“The 2023 temperature anomaly has come out of the blue, revealing an unprecedented knowledge gap perhaps for the first time since about 40 years ago, when satellite data began offering modellers an unparalleled, real-time view of Earth’s climate system,” wrote Gavin Schmidt, a British scientist and the director of the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

If this anomaly does not stabilise by August, he said, it could imply “that a warming planet is already fundamentally altering how the climate system operates, much sooner than scientists had anticipated”.

Many in the science and environment community read these words with alarm. Was the leap in temperatures over the past 13 months, which has exceeded the global heating forecasts of experts, a sign of a systemic shift, or just a temporary anomaly? If the world was warming even faster than scientists thought it would, seemingly jumping years ahead of predictions, would that mean even more crucial decades of action had been lost?

With August now here, Schmidt is a fraction less disturbed. He said the situation remains unclear, but the broader global heating trends are starting to move back in the direction of forecasts. “What I am thinking now is we aren’t that far off from expectations. If we maintain this for the next couple of months then we can say what happened in late 2023 was more ‘blippish’ than systematic. But it is still too early to call it,” he said. “I am slightly less worried, but still humbled that we can’t explain it.”
https://apple.news/ANl39p3O-RoO2wlzB9xu7pw
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Schmidt, said records were beaten last year by a surprising margin and predicts 2024 is also likely to set a new peak, though the trend may nudge closer towards expectations.

Looking back at the most extreme months of heat in the second half of 2023 and early 2024 when the previous records were beaten at times by more than 0.2C, an enormous anomaly, he said scientists were still baffled: “We don’t have a quantitative explanation for even half of it. That is pretty humbling.”

He added: “We should have better answers by now. Climate modelling as an enterprise is not set out to be super reactive. It is a slow, long process in which people around the world are volunteering their time. We haven’t got our act together on this question yet.”

This is not to doubt the underlying science of global heating, which more than 99.9% of climatologists agree is caused by human burning of gas, oil, coal and forests.

That alone is creating alarming new temperature records every year, as the world experienced last month with two consecutive days of heat in excess of anything in human records, and probably also anything in more than 120,000 years.

This is wreaking havoc over an even wider swath of the world by intensifying forest fires, droughts, floods, sea-ice loss and other manifestations of extreme weather.

The worsening trend will continue until fossil fuels are stopped. “As climate change continues, every decade it gets warmer, the impact is larger and the consequences are greater,” Schmidt said. “So in that sense, we are already in uncharted territory with respect to climate and with every decade we go more further out on a limb.”

The recent El Ninõ added to global heat pressures. Scientists have also pointed to the fallout from the January 2022 Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcanic eruption in Tonga, the ramping up of solar activity in the run-up to a predicted solar maximum, and pollution controls that reduced cooling sulphur dioxide particles. But Schmidt said none of these possible causes was sufficient to account for the spike in temperatures.

Schmidt said he hoped a clearer picture would emerge by the time of the American Geophysical Union meeting in December, when many of the world’s top Earth system scientists will gather in New Orleans, Louisiana.

One of the most worrying theories to emerge is that the Earth is losing its albedo, which is the ability of the planet to reflect heat back into space. This is mainly because there is less white ice in the Arctic, Antarctic and mountain glaciers. Peter Cox, a professor at Exeter University, noted on X that this is “contributing hugely to the acceleration of global warming”. It would also suggest the recent records are not just a freak conjunction of factors.

On 29 July, the total extent of sea ice was at a record low for the date and nearly 4m sq km – an area bigger than India – below the 1981-2010 average, according to Zackary Labe, a climate scientist at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

It continues to melt rapidly because temperatures in some parts of Antarctica recently hit 24C above the average for the time of year in the middle of the austral winter.

António Guterres, the secretary-general of the United Nations, warned recently that “Earth is becoming hotter and more dangerous for everyone, everywhere”.

Unprecedented number of heat records broken around world this year


He pointed out that scorching conditions killed 1,300 pilgrims during the hajj in Saudi Arabia, shut down tourist attractions in Europe’s sweatbox cities and closed schools across Asia and Africa.

Temperatures above 50C used to be a rarity confined to two or three global hotspots, but the World Meteorological Organization noted that at least 10 countries have reported this level of searing heat in the past year: the US, Mexico, Morocco, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran, Pakistan, India and China.


In Iran, the heat index – a measure that also includes humidity – has come perilously close to 60C, far above the level considered safe for humans.

Heatwaves are now commonplace elsewhere, killing the most vulnerable, worsening inequality and threatening the wellbeing of future generations. Unicef calculates a quarter of the world’s children are already exposed to frequent heatwaves, and this will rise to almost 100% by mid-century.

The pace of change is disorienting. Schmidt says there is a 72% chance that 2024 will beat last year’s heat record. The likelihood will rise still higher if there is no cooling La Niña by December.

While some argue that the world will soon pass the lower Paris agreement guardrail of 1.5C of heating above the preindustrial average, Schmidt says the more important goal should be to phase out carbon emissions as quickly as possible: “What should be motivating people is that with every tenth of a degree of warming, the impacts will increase. That is the fundamental equation. It doesn’t matter where we are now, but we have to get to net zero. The faster that happens, then the happier we will be.”

At times, he acknowledged that his work puts him in a bind because as a scientist he wants his forecasts about global heating to be accurate, but as a human he would rather they proved an overestimate.

“We would all rather be wrong than right on this,” he says. “That is the one thing that sceptics don’t understand.”
Our planet is hotter than ever – and this is what we're up against


So scientists are baffled why. Does this mean they’ve used the incorrect modelling? Or is it because of the likes of volcanic activity throwing their calculations out?
They mention waiting until August, do they then redo calculations? Or add more information to their studies. They quote temperatures going back 120,000 years. That’s mind boggling. Do they measure that from ice samples? Maybe their calculations might be out on that as well.
I suppose we’ll know more in a month or two, seeing it’s already the middle of August.
* note highlights embedded in article*
 
So that's it then.
The experts got no *smile* idea why *smile* happening, the worlds gunna cook n we're all gunna die. Oh well, it was fun while it lasted, just don't forget to kiss your arse goodbye n wave as ya shuffle off the planet. Bloody arse holes of humans *smile* things up again, should just sack the *smile* lot of them, then the planet could get back to normal operations.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
They know what is happening, they just didn't think it would accelerate so soon. I suspect that the models were kept conservative because of the deniers. In any case, science is conservative (in the true sense of the word) so it is not surprising that the models have likely underestimated the speed of the changes happening.

It is a worry, means all the time wasted dealing with the deniers and their cashed up lobbyists has caused even more of a problem.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
They know what is happening, they just didn't think it would accelerate so soon. I suspect that the models were kept conservative because of the deniers. In any case, science is conservative (in the true sense of the word) so it is not surprising that the models have likely underestimated the speed of the changes happening.

It is a worry, means all the time wasted dealing with the deniers and their cashed up lobbyists has caused even more of a problem.

DS
How could it be even more of a problem Dave? If the scientists are right then Old Ma Nature simply gets the opportunity to get the dunny brush n pine o cleen out a bit earlier, scrub out all the crap polish up the planet n start again. Perhaps without those grubby, mess making human arse holes second time around
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Forget global warming, the biggest threat to humanity is nuclear warming.
Nah. Nearly everybody of any sort of relevance or importance has got a big handful of mega kabooms, plus there's a shitload of nuke factories around the place as well. Everyone that's got them struts around with their chests puffed up n their arses clenched mega tight coz they're so afraid that some rabid little peanut might get pissed off n start chucking kabooms.
 
They know what is happening, they just didn't think it would accelerate so soon. I suspect that the models were kept conservative because of the deniers. In any case, science is conservative (in the true sense of the word) so it is not surprising that the models have likely underestimated the speed of the changes happening.

It is a worry, means all the time wasted dealing with the deniers and their cashed up lobbyists has caused even more of a problem.

DS
What if it resumes back to the conservative model after a couple of months? What would it mean then? Just a glitch or outlier in the modelling? Or the modelling is flawed?
 
What if it resumes back to the conservative model after a couple of months? What would it mean then? Just a glitch or outlier in the modelling? Or the modelling is flawed?

Then we take action a bit earlier than we absolutely had to. Not as if we don't know human caused climate change is happening, a few decades of warning already. We are already taking too little action too late so it is hardly the case that we would be doing too much to mitigate the damage.

Of course, we could just wait, float pie in the sky fantasies like nuclear and watch the mess unfold.

DS
 
Of course, we could just wait, float pie in the sky fantasies like nuclear and watch the mess unfold.

DS

We are going to pick this one.

Look over the ditch to see the short term impacts of rushing the transition. They have flipped to more coal and are also hollowing out their manufacturing.

I know we need a longer view but people are going to chose warmth, cost of living and trips to Bali over climate change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users