Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:DGW - Dinosaurogenic Global Warming (Score 3, Informative) 180

Of course, the problem with focusing exclusively on the costs of trying to stop or (more realistically) slow climate change implicitly assumes that inaction won't cost us anything. In fact we're looking at costs either way. We're in a minimax kind of situation: how do we minimize the maximum costs?

There's also another wrinkle to this, which is that costs (and indeed profits -- every misfortune profits someone) aren't distributed evenly. The key determinant of how much you have to pay for or profit from climate change is how mobile your capital is. If you're a Bengladeshi subsistence farmer you're going to take +2C right on the chin. If you're a Wall Street bank you take your investments out of farms which are going to lose productivity in the next ten years or so shift to underwriting the opening of new farms in newly favorable places. In other words you make money going and coming. Likewise if you own multiple homes your risk from local changes is spread out. If the lion's share of your nest egg is in a house that is in the new 20 year floodplain or in the range of a newly endemic zoonosis, you're screwed.

So even if you can't avoid +2C without climate engineering (which might not be such a bad thing), getting there in ten years instead of twenty or thirty makes a huge difference. And beyond 2C, there are other benchmarks beyond that we don't want to hit in a hurry.

This is not a black-and-white situation: that we had our chance to do something and now there is nothing we can do. We had our chance to avoid this situation and now we're talking about how much time we'll have to adapt.

Comment Re:Pretty sure I read this story last decade. (Score 1) 180


11 years without a major hurricane strike. I was pretty sure the east coast and at least NYC were supposed to be under water by now


Under the right conditions, a "major hurricane" isn't required. Have we already forgotten Hurricane Sandy, the disaster which led a respected Republican to embrace a Kenyan?
Hurricane strikes are largely luck or the lack of it.

Also, try not to be US-centric - it's called GLOBAL warming; there has been some impressive typhoons in the past few years, including one that was 1/2 the size of India - or 2.5 times the size of Texas. That was Haiyan aka Super Typhoon Yolanda which killed 10,000 Filipinos.

There's also some dispute as to whether or not we'll see more superstorms as wind shear may be exacerbated by a warming world and that should reduce the number of hurricanes.

Comment Re:Is this the same "One Decade" we were promised. (Score 2) 180

The "hiatus" in global warming was produced by choosing 1998 as the baseline year. Why was 1998 a good year to use as a baseline? Because it was, by far, the hottest year on record when it happened, shattering the previous record (1997) by 0.13C.

Now this is a news for nerds site, so I don't have to explain why cherrypicking an outlier as your baseline is dishonest. People who swallowed that are either dishonest or mathematical ignoramuses.

I will go out on a limb right now and say that since El Niño has passed an next year will be less warm, sometime around 2020 we'll be hearing "No significant warming since 2016."

Comment Re:Scripts on web pages, take ages to finish page. (Score 1) 207

don't run an ad blocker and I see the behavior OP complained about every day .

Yes, that was my point. It's the ads, you see. In case it's not clear, the problem you're having? It's the ads. They're what's causing that problem. The ads. In case it wasn't clear.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you're not careful, you're going to catch something.