And probably also the volumetric expansion of water as temp rises

MikeB4:

 

The shows the inundation risk areas of combined sea level rise with combined tidal and storm surge rises. NIWA has a lot of information regarding this.

 

And yet the accompanying caption states 1.5m of sea level rise. So does the diagram display that, plus a spring tide, plus a storm surge? Or 1.5m above the current high tide level from all additional environmental forces?

The most aggregious example I’ve seen of this recently was a YT video that referenced 30cm of rise and then preceded to display inundation animations for a 10m rise.

A discussion I had with my brother in law (works for Niwa doing stuff that mostly goes over my head) about the scenarios around climate change and one of his responses kinda brought it home. He said the debating over the sea rise being 1m or 1.2 or 1.5 or the rise in sea temperature or acidity  is 5% or 8%  or is it man made or natural event is like debating is it the fall that kills your the sudden stop at the bottom the outcome is the same.

MikeB4:

 

A discussion I had with my brother in law (works for Niwa doing stuff that mostly goes over my head) about the scenarios around climate change and one of his responses kinda brought it home. He said the debating over the sea rise being 1m or 1.2 or 1.5 or the rise in sea temperature or acidity  is 5% or 8%  or is it man made or natural event is like debating is it the fall that kills your the sudden stop at the bottom the outcome is the same.

 

So you have an unequivocal view of catastrophic climate change while admitting that it is “mostly over my head”?

Using your fall analogy, how about that falling feeling is due to you being on a rollercoaster?

Change is happening.

Dingbatt:

 

 

 

So you have an unequivocal view of catastrophic climate change while admitting that it is “mostly over my head”?

 

Using your fall analogy, how about that falling feeling is due to you being on a rollercoaster?

 

Change is happening.

 

I don't profess to be an expert but I am smart enough to understand what I read or what I hear and not afraid to ask for clarification from those that do. In this my brother in law is a professional in the field and his clarification is always helpful and informative. A rollercoaster will usually have a predictable and safe outcome but a fall is going be an owie to some degree.

Dingbatt:

 

So you have an unequivocal view of catastrophic climate change while admitting that it is “mostly over my head”?

 

Using your fall analogy, how about that falling feeling is due to you being on a rollercoaster?

 

Change is happening.

 

Whilst it isn't necessarily catastrophic, it will certainly be bad. We have optimised our use of land based on the current climate. When the climate changes, lots of infrastructure will be lost (or saved at huge cost), and there will be disruption of many lives.

So the rollercoaster analogy doesn't really apply. Maybe it's a great feeling of "whee!!!" right now, but some time it's going to hurt. I think a better analogy is racing down a road with uncertain brakes. The longer we leave before braking, the more likely that it's going to end in a crash. Of course, braking early reduces the "whee!!" factor.

There are a string of issues, it will be a catastrophe if its not managed . Arable land will decrease, weather to grow it will be erratic, fresh water will reduce (it already is now) sea water will become less oxygenated as it warms,. marine life will die, further adding to acidity. As water temp differentials reduces so will the Great Water tunnel or whatever its called . A whole host of issues. Who's paying for excess power usage to combat heat and cold? Desalination plants? Need plenty of them.

OK, So as well as declaring a Climate Emergency, the movement will promise to

 “show leadership and demonstrate what is possible to other sectors of the New Zealand economy by reducing the Government’s own emissions and becoming a carbon-neutral Government by 2025.”

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300172852/jacinda-ardern-to-declare-climate-change-emergency-today-promising-a-carbonneutral-government-by-2025

Now this is all well and good, but I haven't seen any work done on what the actual government's carbon footprint actually is, and I suspect it will take at least a year to work it out.....

But, from a first glance the "Government" is likely already Carbon-Neutral as 30% of NZ's land area is in Conservation land with large chunks of that being native forest sinks,

We use these sinks in our international accounting, so it would seem odd that the government would not use them domestically to account for its footprint

MikeB4:

 

Dingbatt:

 

 

 

So you have an unequivocal view of catastrophic climate change while admitting that it is “mostly over my head”?

 

Using your fall analogy, how about that falling feeling is due to you being on a rollercoaster?

 

Change is happening.

 

 

I don't profess to be an expert but I am smart enough to understand what I read or what I hear and not afraid to ask for clarification from those that do. In this my brother in law is a professional in the field and his clarification is always helpful and informative. A rollercoaster will usually have a predictable and safe outcome but a fall is going be an owie to some degree.

 

 

 

I would be interested to know what sort of reception your BIL would get at his work if he turned up and said he thought Anthropological Global Warming was overblown and he would like funding and a team to prove it. I would hope being a scientific organisation, it would be.

Dingbatt:

 

 

 

 

 

I would be interested to know what sort of reception your BIL would get at his work if he turned up and said he thought Anthropological Global Warming was overblown and he would like funding and a team to prove it. I would hope being a scientific organisation, it would be.

 

In discussions with him he agrees with me on the point that historical evidence shows that climate changes have occurred in the past by natural swings and off earth events such as Asteroid impacts. However the evidence that Anthropological influences are exacerbating and accelerating climate change is overwhelming therefore I don't believe he would push such a narrative the is is overblown. It is clear to me that he believes that the current lack of urgency around planning for and mitigating the affects of climate change worries him and to use his words "scares the friggin pants off him". I am going to text him however to see what his reaction to that notion of putting foreward the idea  that Anthropological Global Warming was overblown would be even though his response is reasonably predictable. 

MikeB4:

 

 

 

In discussions with him he agrees with me on the point that historical evidence shows that climate changes have occurred in the past by natural swings and off earth events such as Asteroid impacts. However the evidence that Anthropological influences are exacerbating and accelerating climate change is overwhelming therefore I don't believe he would push such a narrative the is is overblown. It is clear to me that he believes that the current lack of urgency around planning for and mitigating the affects of climate change worries him and to use his words "scares the friggin pants off him". I am going to text him however to see what his reaction to that notion of putting foreward the idea  that Anthropological Global Warming was overblown would be even though his response is reasonably predictable. 

 

I think you missed the point I believe was being made.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/12/climate-change-emergency-how-the-government-plans-to-make-public-sector-carbon-neutral-by-2050.html

Start by stopping the fluff of warm air escaping from their faces. I think the carbon footprint of talking about what to do is greater than the action taken :)

sittingduckz:

 

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/12/climate-change-emergency-how-the-government-plans-to-make-public-sector-carbon-neutral-by-2050.html

 

 

 

Start by stopping the fluff of warm air escaping from their faces. I think the carbon footprint of talking about what to do is greater than the action taken :)

 

By end of 2022 or even 2025 I'd be taking an interest.. 2050 is to far off.

openmedia:

 

sittingduckz:

 

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/12/climate-change-emergency-how-the-government-plans-to-make-public-sector-carbon-neutral-by-2050.html

 

 

 

Start by stopping the fluff of warm air escaping from their faces. I think the carbon footprint of talking about what to do is greater than the action taken :)

 

 

By end of 2022 or even 2025 I'd be taking an interest.. 2050 is to far off.

 

It is 2025 , Newshub are wrong...

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/public-sector-be-carbon-neutral-2025