Tyndall Center Director Anderson: Rapid Emissions Reduction Hard: 4-6C Far, Far Worse

[AverageJoe90]

50. Maybe. I just don't have the faith that it'll necessarily be true, though.

It's very possible that you could be right about the 1% hoarding energy actually resulting in less usage overall. I would actually hope so, but TBH, I'm not at all optimistic about that, especially not if the Military-Industrial Complex is still alive and well mid-century or so.

Im not saying economic justice and energy conservation cannot occur in tandem, but showing that current economic models put the two at odds when examining just the notion of disparity.

The problem is, which ones? There's still some good stuff to read, but there's also lots of crap flooding out there, too. And when somebody like Christopher Booker, just another anti-AGW skeptic keeps claiming that reducing Co2 emissions will necessarily virtually shut down the global economy, I gotta be honest with you man, that sets off some red flags in my mind.

It is indeed possible that there may be a few negative short-term economic effects, particularly in regions where dirty energy dominates, but the long-term benefits will be enormous.

BTW, I think life would be pretty damn hard with these predicted temperatures. When droughts set in and rivers become too warm to incubate fish (that bring in nutrients from the oceans), there will be nothing to eat for at least half the worlds population; ecosystems are beginning to breakdown already. It is not going to be pretty.

I probably wouldn't quite go that far, but yeah, we can both agree that it doesn't paint a pretty picture regardless.