HL Climate Change Thread: Fare the well old world

[Baka's Weird Case]

The whole country actin like this idiot is some kind of dark horse too republicans real relieved to have a woman running for president with all these donald shenanigans

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

Shell accused of strategy risking catastrophic climate change

Shell accused of strategy risking catastrophic climate change


Environmentalists say presumption of global temperature rise to 4C undermines multinational’s ability to talk with authority on climate change



Royal Dutch Shell has been accused of pursuing a strategy that would lead to potentially catastrophic climate change after an internal document acknowledged a global temperature rise of 4C, twice the level considered safe for the planet.

A paper used for guiding future business planning at the Anglo-Dutch multinational assumes that carbon dioxide emissions will fail to limit temperature increases to 2C, the internationally agreed threshold to prevent widespread flooding, famine and desertification.

Instead, the New Lens Scenarios document refers to a forecast by the independent International Energy Agency (IEA) that points to a temperature rise of up to 4C in the short term, rising later to 6C.

The revelations come ahead of the annual general meeting of Shell shareholders in the Netherlands on Tuesday, where the group has accepted a shareholder resolution demanding more transparency about the group’s impact on climate change.

Hundreds of environmentalists took to the seas off Seattle in kayaks, canoes and paddleboards on Sunday to protest against the company’s’s controversial plans to drill in the Arctic Ocean. The “Shell No” protest was held close to where Shell’s Polar Pioneer drilling rig is docked. One banner read: “We can’t burn all the oil on the planet and still live on it.”

Ben van Beurden, the Shell chief executive, has repeatedly stated that the fossil fuel giant is a responsible company that fully accepts the need to counter manmade global warming, has campaigned for a tax on greenhouse gas emissions, and is moving its focus from oil to cleaner fuels such as gas.

But an analysis of Shell’s New Lens planning document points to an acceptance that world temperatures will rise to a level that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change argues would have a severe and widespread impact. A 4C global rise by 2100 would entail a sea level rise of between 52cm and 98cm, leading to widespread coastal flooding. There would be widespread risk of animal and plant extinctions and global agriculture would be severely hit. A 4C average would also mask more severe local impacts: the Arctic and western and southern Africa could experience warming up to 10C.

The Shell document says: “Both our (oceans and mountains) scenarios and the IEA New Policies scenario (and our base case energy demand and outlook) do not limit emissions to be consistent with the back-calculated 450 parts per million (Co2 in the atmosphere) 2 degrees C.”

It adds: “We also do not see governments taking steps now that are consistent with 2 degrees C scenario.”

Environmentalists said the presumptions undermine Shell’s ability to talk with authority on climate change.

Charlie Kronick, climate campaigner at campaign group Greenpeace, said Shell and IEA saw fossil fuels continuing to be burned, with the earth facing temperature rises of 3.7°C or 4°C in the short term, mounting to 6°C later on.

“What I don’t see is a realisation from Shell about what exactly would happen to its business if climate change escalated dramatically beyond what is safe with all the negative consequences in the world for food and water never mind energy,” said Kronick.

Louise Rouse, an investor relations specialist and consultant to Greenpeace, said the New Lens document undermined Shell’s claim that ongoing oil and gas exploration helps raise living standards in the developing world by supplying the energy for rapidly expanding economies.

“There is an incoherence at best between oil companies on the one hand positioning themselves as being on the side of the world’s developing countries and while on the other actively pursuing strategies which will entail catastrophic climate change which we already know is having a significant impact on the global south,” she said.

Friends of the Earth in the Netherlands, which has carried out its own review of activities by the Anglo-Dutch oil group, said the company often argues that it is moving away from oil towards cleaner gas but has often concentrated on the most carbon intensive forms of gas such as liquefied natural gas.

Shell declined to comment formally on the New Lens scenarios but oil industry experts said they were not meant to be a business blueprint. Instead, they represent “plausible assumptions and quantification” designed to make executives consider events that may be only remotely possible. The expert added: “Scenarios are not intended to be predictions of likely future events or outcomes.”

 

[acri1]

The free market will deal with it. If too many people suffer or die as a result of the effects of climate change, Shell will eventually lose business and have to change their policies. Until then, it is what it is. If there are a couple droughts, famines, and natural disasters...hey, that's the price of freedom.

The only responsibility a business has is to its shareholders...ain't that right @DEAD7 ?

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

The free market will deal with it. If too many people suffer or die as a result of the effects of climate change, Shell will eventually lose business and have to change their policies. Until then, it is what it is. If there are a couple droughts, famines, and natural disasters...hey, that's the price of freedom.

The only responsibility a business has is to its shareholders...ain't that right @DEAD7 ?

Volkswagen's 500k recall from emissions cheating will surely cause consumers to stop investing in their product

Inefficient lightbulbs drive up energy costs in the home, surely people will make the rational choice to stop buying incandescent bulbs

If the waste and emissions from animal agriculture kill too many people they will stop buying meat


#DEAD7THINGS

 

[Serious]

subs....

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

sounds like a pretty shytty strategy or will the company be carrying on when man no longer exists?

 

[acri1]

Volkswagen's 500k recall from emissions cheating will surely cause consumers to stop investing in their product

Inefficient lightbulbs drive up energy costs in the home, surely people will make the rational choice to stop buying incandescent bulbs

If the waste and emissions from animal agriculture kill too many people they will stop buying meat


#DEAD7THINGS

I never truly appreciated the power of the free market before homie enlightened us.


If coastal cities start flooding then the displaced refugees will stop supporting companies that wouldn't reduce their Co2 emissions and that'll make the flooding stop. Market corrections FTW.

If enough crops start failing due to droughts then I'm sure the farmers (and starving populations) will vote with their pocketbooks and hurt the bottom lines of companies that caused that situation

There's no doubt that when wildfire season becomes several months longer and the affected areas increase in size by double or more, the affected individuals who just lost all of their posessions will punish the businesses that created the situation and the market will correct itself


#DEAD7THINGS

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

the invisible hand of the market will handle this brehs, don't you all worry for a second

 

[DEAD7]

The Pentagon believes that climate change is real, as do insurance companies and now Shell. The longer the list gets, the harder it's going to be for the wingnuts to deny it.

 

[Shogun]

Invest in sand bags, brehs

 

[Brown_Pride]

I never truly appreciated the power of the free market before homie enlightened us.


If coastal cities start flooding then the displaced refugees will stop supporting companies that wouldn't reduce their Co2 emissions and that'll make the flooding stop. Market corrections FTW.

If enough crops start failing due to droughts then I'm sure the farmers (and starving populations) will vote with their pocketbooks and hurt the bottom lines of companies that caused that situation

There's no doubt that when wildfire season becomes several months longer and the affected areas increase in size by double or more, the affected individuals who just lost all of their posessions will punish the businesses that created the situation and the market will correct itself


#DEAD7THINGS

Don't be silly. It's not that displaced populations will stop supporting companies it's that mother nature will stop supporting people who support companies...and also people who don't.

Remember most of the world's populations lives near the cost. When that world population is...drowned...they can't emit CO2, ergo the problem technically corrects itself.

Move on people nothing to see here. More librul communist speak.

 

[ill]

Invest in sand bags, brehs

Nah, buy property 50-100miles inland for dirt cheap right now. Wait til the sea levels rise and wipe out the current coast. Sell/profit on your new beach front property

 

[acri1]

New Research Reveals The US Cities That Have Already Been Doomed By Climate Change

Low-lying American cities such as New Orleans and Miami will be mostly submerged at high tide in the future, but with extreme carbon cuts, large coastal cities in New York and California could be spared, according to new findings published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences this week.

Previous work revealed that unabated carbon emissions up to the year 2100 would lead to a global sea-level rise of 4.3 to 9.9 meters (14 to 32 feet). And unfortunately, even if we were to cut carbon emissions immediately and abruptly, temperatures will continue to increase for millennia because of the long residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere and how slowly heat is exchanged between the ocean and the atmosphere.

By examining data on topography, tides, and censuses, a trio led by Climate Central’s Benjamin Strauss calculated the risk U.S. cities face from long-term sea level rise under scenarios of unabated climate change (and the inevitable collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet) as well as those with aggressive cuts in carbon emissions.

More than 20 million Americans currently live on at-risk land, the team found. The total area includes up to 1,825 municipalities, including the majority of 21 cities with population sizes of 100,000 or more. With aggressive carbon cuts – and if the West Antarctic Ice Sheet remains stable – more than half of these municipalities could avoid becoming inundated.

The researchers also calculated lock-in dates. That’s when the cumulative effects of carbon emissions commit a city to a rise in sea level that submerges land where more than half of their population lives. If we carry on as usual with unabated carbon emissions, Norfolk, Virginia, faces a lock-in date of 2045, for example. For New Orleans, the limit has already been exceeded.

"In our analysis, a lot of cities have futures that depend on our carbon choices but some appear to be already lost," Strauss tells AFP. "And it is hard to imagine how we could defend Miami in the long run." The low-elevation city’s porous limestone foundation means that sea walls and levees won’t help. "New Orleans is a really sad story," he adds. "It is a lot worse looking than Miami." Under all scenarios, Florida is the most affected state. California, Louisiana, and New York trail slightly behind.

The team has developed an interactive map where you can type in any U.S. city or zip code and see its submergence levels with various emissions scenarios.

New Research Reveals The US Cities That Have Already Been Doomed By Climate Change


Damn. If you live in NO or Miami and have (or plan to have) kids, might be time to encourage them move elsewhere when they finish school.

 

[CHL]

I wish all the climate deniers moved to Miami and NO.