Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kernals12]

Climate change could turn the Sahel, which is one of the poorest places on earth, green
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climatechange-africa-sahel-idUSKBN19Q2WK

[kernals12]

Kind of curious, if you hate winter so much, why stay in Massaschusetts?

I dislike the winter, but I've never decided to make a list of why it sucks in an effort to argue for, what I can only assume, is some quest to geo-engineer winter out of the climate. My beef, as stated earlier, is how the government reacts to it, which is (theoretically) resolvable.

I'm 23 years old and have struggled to find permanent employment since I graduated from college so I can't move out of my parent's house which is in Massachusetts. And there's lots to like about this state, with its forests, its strong knowledge economy, and its progressive values.

Rooting for climate change. Much progressive.

That’s an interesting take isn’t it?  That might make things in Massachusetts slightly more balmy, but what about all those other cities that suddenly would be in desert climates or might even be flooded over by sea level rise?  Then again all those polar ice caps melting might have the opposite effect and begin to shut down the oceanic current.

Deserts are created by a lack of rain, not by heat. And with 2 degrees of warming, sea level rise would be about 18 inches by 2100, which is completely manageable. I would recommend we do this

There is a whole lot of places just in the United States that are classified as Mediterranean that potentially dip into desert territory if a prolonged drought becomes the new normalized climate.  While not exactly full climate change (upstream diversions play a part) related I would point to the Central Valley California which historically has just hovered above 10 inches annually in terms of precipitation.  What happens when that dips below 10 inches a year for good and the water supply from snow melt off dwindles?  I’d argue that the beginning of that desertification has already been underway for some time. 

Regarding the flooding of coastlines, yes from all current data I’ve seen it suggests nothing in my lifetime will lead to a major abandonment.  That’s the problem with playing the short game with climate and geology, you’re not factoring what happens when you’re gone.  I can’t imagine places like New Orleans and Miami will be viable for long after the start of the 22nd Century.

Since we're speculating, what if climate change leads to a permanent El Nino that gives California tons of extra rain?

[Max Rockatansky]

Kind of curious, if you hate winter so much, why stay in Massaschusetts?

I dislike the winter, but I've never decided to make a list of why it sucks in an effort to argue for, what I can only assume, is some quest to geo-engineer winter out of the climate. My beef, as stated earlier, is how the government reacts to it, which is (theoretically) resolvable.

I'm 23 years old and have struggled to find permanent employment since I graduated from college so I can't move out of my parent's house which is in Massachusetts. And there's lots to like about this state, with its forests, its strong knowledge economy, and its progressive values.

Rooting for climate change. Much progressive.

That’s an interesting take isn’t it?  That might make things in Massachusetts slightly more balmy, but what about all those other cities that suddenly would be in desert climates or might even be flooded over by sea level rise?  Then again all those polar ice caps melting might have the opposite effect and begin to shut down the oceanic current.

Deserts are created by a lack of rain, not by heat. And with 2 degrees of warming, sea level rise would be about 18 inches by 2100, which is completely manageable. I would recommend we do this

There is a whole lot of places just in the United States that are classified as Mediterranean that potentially dip into desert territory if a prolonged drought becomes the new normalized climate.  While not exactly full climate change (upstream diversions play a part) related I would point to the Central Valley California which historically has just hovered above 10 inches annually in terms of precipitation.  What happens when that dips below 10 inches a year for good and the water supply from snow melt off dwindles?  I’d argue that the beginning of that desertification has already been underway for some time. 

Regarding the flooding of coastlines, yes from all current data I’ve seen it suggests nothing in my lifetime will lead to a major abandonment.  That’s the problem with playing the short game with climate and geology, you’re not factoring what happens when you’re gone.  I can’t imagine places like New Orleans and Miami will be viable for long after the start of the 22nd Century.

Since we're speculating, what if climate change leads to a permanent El Nino that gives California tons of extra rain?

It would be a hell of a reversal of how things have been trending since the 1870s and even longer via the already existing natural warming process.  They don’t call the Great Basin Desert as such just for fun, it’s essentially just a giant dry lake bed.

[US 89]

Deserts are created by a lack of rain, not by heat.

Not necessarily. As a climatic zone, deserts are defined by the relationship between precipitation and potential evapotranspiration, which is a function of temperature. Given the same amount of water in a cold and warm place, the warm place will evaporate more of it, which means less is available for plants, runoff, agriculture, etc.

Fairbanks, for example, gets only 10.8 inches of rainfall a year - an amount comparable to Albuquerque's 9.5 inches. But look at a satellite view of the two cities and you'll notice ABQ looks a hell of a lot more desert-like - because it's a lot warmer, so after evaporation a much smaller proportion of that rainfall is usable in ABQ than in Fairbanks.

[kalvado]

Regarding the flooding of coastlines, yes from all current data I’ve seen it suggests nothing in my lifetime will lead to a major abandonment.  That’s the problem with playing the short game with climate and geology, you’re not factoring what happens when you’re gone.  I can’t imagine places like New Orleans and Miami will be viable for long after the start of the 22nd Century.

AN example nearby: Hudson is an estuary, with the water level in Albany NY / Troy NY  being an inch or two above mean sea level, and tidal changes being pretty good in the area
Now, that mean sea level gone up by about a foot over the past 100 years.
There are a few old homes which get flooded periodically, and IMHO need to be abandoned. However, people living there cannot afford a new place, and in general - few people can afford to abandon their homes and happily move on...

[kernals12]

Regarding the flooding of coastlines, yes from all current data I’ve seen it suggests nothing in my lifetime will lead to a major abandonment.  That’s the problem with playing the short game with climate and geology, you’re not factoring what happens when you’re gone.  I can’t imagine places like New Orleans and Miami will be viable for long after the start of the 22nd Century.

AN example nearby: Hudson is an estuary, with the water level in Albany NY / Troy NY  being an inch or two above mean sea level, and tidal changes being pretty good in the area
Now, that mean sea level gone up by about a foot over the past 100 years.
There are a few old homes which get flooded periodically, and IMHO need to be abandoned. However, people living there cannot afford a new place, and in general - few people can afford to abandon their homes and happily move on...

We may be talking about different things, but Google says Albany has an elevation of 141 feet.

As for those unfortunate homeowners, couldn't the state seize them by eminent domain and give them compensation? And would moving those homes not be an option?

[SectorZ]

I still don't get how someone who stays in a state due to its left-leaning politics actively roots for anthropogenic climate change.

[kernals12]

I still don't get how someone who stays in a state due to its left-leaning politics actively roots for anthropogenic climate change.

Did you not read the other 2 reasons I like Mass?

[1]

I still don't get how someone who stays in a state due to its left-leaning politics actively roots for anthropogenic climate change.

Did you not read the other 2 reasons I like Mass?

Forests are the entirety of the Eastern Time Zone in the US.

[US 89]

We may be talking about different things, but Google says Albany has an elevation of 141 feet.

Albany is in a hilly area. The river is at sea level.

[kalvado]

Regarding the flooding of coastlines, yes from all current data I’ve seen it suggests nothing in my lifetime will lead to a major abandonment.  That’s the problem with playing the short game with climate and geology, you’re not factoring what happens when you’re gone.  I can’t imagine places like New Orleans and Miami will be viable for long after the start of the 22nd Century.

AN example nearby: Hudson is an estuary, with the water level in Albany NY / Troy NY  being an inch or two above mean sea level, and tidal changes being pretty good in the area
Now, that mean sea level gone up by about a foot over the past 100 years.
There are a few old homes which get flooded periodically, and IMHO need to be abandoned. However, people living there cannot afford a new place, and in general - few people can afford to abandon their homes and happily move on...

We may be talking about different things, but Google says Albany has an elevation of 141 feet.

As for those unfortunate homeowners, couldn't the state seize them by eminent domain and give them compensation? And would moving those homes not be an option?

Terrain rises pretty fast away from the river; you probably see a number for a city hall or something like that. Hudson water level itself is in single-digit feet (sometimes negative single digits): https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/stationhome.html?id=8518995#obs
https://water.weather.gov/ahps2/hydrograph.php?gage=albn6&wfo=aly

Yes, state action should be the answer IMHO, but again - it is about money and politics. I am just saying what things are as of right now.

[kernals12]

Regarding the flooding of coastlines, yes from all current data I’ve seen it suggests nothing in my lifetime will lead to a major abandonment.  That’s the problem with playing the short game with climate and geology, you’re not factoring what happens when you’re gone.  I can’t imagine places like New Orleans and Miami will be viable for long after the start of the 22nd Century.

AN example nearby: Hudson is an estuary, with the water level in Albany NY / Troy NY  being an inch or two above mean sea level, and tidal changes being pretty good in the area
Now, that mean sea level gone up by about a foot over the past 100 years.
There are a few old homes which get flooded periodically, and IMHO need to be abandoned. However, people living there cannot afford a new place, and in general - few people can afford to abandon their homes and happily move on...

We may be talking about different things, but Google says Albany has an elevation of 141 feet.

As for those unfortunate homeowners, couldn't the state seize them by eminent domain and give them compensation? And would moving those homes not be an option?

Terrain rises pretty fast away from the river; you probably see a number for a city hall or something like that. Hudson water level itself is in single-digit feet (sometimes negative single digits): https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/stationhome.html?id=8518995#obs
https://water.weather.gov/ahps2/hydrograph.php?gage=albn6&wfo=aly

Yes, state action should be the answer IMHO, but again - it is about money and politics. I am just saying what things are as of right now.

I'd suggest we dam off the glaciers of Greenland and Antarctica
https://www.fastcompany.com/90239204/could-a-giant-underwater-wall-help-save-glaciers-from-collapse

[1]

Regarding the flooding of coastlines, yes from all current data I’ve seen it suggests nothing in my lifetime will lead to a major abandonment.  That’s the problem with playing the short game with climate and geology, you’re not factoring what happens when you’re gone.  I can’t imagine places like New Orleans and Miami will be viable for long after the start of the 22nd Century.

AN example nearby: Hudson is an estuary, with the water level in Albany NY / Troy NY  being an inch or two above mean sea level, and tidal changes being pretty good in the area
Now, that mean sea level gone up by about a foot over the past 100 years.
There are a few old homes which get flooded periodically, and IMHO need to be abandoned. However, people living there cannot afford a new place, and in general - few people can afford to abandon their homes and happily move on...

We may be talking about different things, but Google says Albany has an elevation of 141 feet.

As for those unfortunate homeowners, couldn't the state seize them by eminent domain and give them compensation? And would moving those homes not be an option?

Terrain rises pretty fast away from the river; you probably see a number for a city hall or something like that. Hudson water level itself is in single-digit feet (sometimes negative single digits): https://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/stationhome.html?id=8518995#obs
https://water.weather.gov/ahps2/hydrograph.php?gage=albn6&wfo=aly

Yes, state action should be the answer IMHO, but again - it is about money and politics. I am just saying what things are as of right now.

I'd suggest we dam off the glaciers of Greenland and Antarctica
https://www.fastcompany.com/90239204/could-a-giant-underwater-wall-help-save-glaciers-from-collapse

Sea level rise is occurring mainly because warmer water expands. Very little of it is from ice melting.

[tman]

I loathe the cold. And from any rational viewpoint, you should too. It's expensive, bringing lots of problems that have no equivalent on the side of heat. I call it the "Frost Tax". Here's what it consists of:

-The Cost of Snow Removal
-The Cost of Warm Clothing
-The Cost of Natural Gas and Heating Oil
-The Cost of Snow Tires
-The Cost of Vehicles with All Wheel Drive
-The Cost of Engineering buildings to withstand the weight of snow
-Damage to highways by freeze thaw cycles
-Water pollution from road salt
-Closure of schools and businesses by snowstorms
-Disruption of airport operations by snowstorms
-Deaths from Hypothermia
-Car accidents from black ice
-Injuries from slipping on ice
-Seasonality of agriculture, construction, and tourism

We all pay the frost tax in obscure ways. Last week, in anticipation of a major snowstorm, I pulled my wipers away from my windshield, and in the process I stripped one of them. Getting a new one cost $70 and due to the post office's current problems, it's days late, so I've been driving with one wiper.

Maybe climate change isn't so bad.

Interesting take, though I can't say I agree with much of it (as a passionate winter-lover).

Here's one opposing Minnesotan perspective...

-We have ~$100 gas bills to heat 3500sf in the coldest months (not at all unreasonable IMHO). We'd certanly spend more to cool an equivalent house in the south, and most of those houses need heat anyway...
-The clothing I own isn't probably that different from what I'd own if I lived in Dallas or OKC. I mean, you're still going to need pants and long sleeves for the winter. I have a jacket with a removable liner, boots and gloves. No big deal.
-I drive a FWD car with all-season tires, and can get around just fine for the vast majority of the winter. No AWD needed - no added cost there.
-I've never broken a wiper blade due to the cold, but I usually spend around $15 on them anyway. (Also, it seems wiper blades last longer in cold climates anyway!)
-There's no clear connection between winter weather and traffic fatalities. In fact, many of the most dangerous states to drive in are in the south.
-We have a ~15 year old $500 snowblower that's never broken down. It uses about $5 in gas per winter, less than our mower uses in gas each summer. The cost of personal snow removal is pretty negligible. Oh, $10 in rock salt a year too.
-MnDOT is pretty good at cleaning up after snows, so travel disruptions seldom last for more than a day or two after larger storms.
-This point is of course personal preference, but I love each of our four seasons. I'm always ready for the next one, even winter. And I'm never more excited than during the first snow of the season. Even so, the first 60-degree day of spring? Bliss. For me, it's all about the contrast and the change.
-Other than SoCal, there aren't many places with great year-round weather anyway. I'd take the cold over the heat, but some have the opposite perspective.
-We adapt. While people everywhere love to talk about their locale's extreme weather, life pretty much just goes on no matter where you are.



I grew up, and still live for part of the year, in southern Minnesota (~40 inches of snow/year) and am going to school in eastern Nebraska (~30 inches/year).  I greatly prefer places with consistently cold, snowy winters to those south of there (I dislike the brown look of lower-midwestern winter). I wouldn't want to live anywhere getting less snow than that, and would likely not even consider places that don't get at least a few snows a year (Albuquerque or Asheville might be okay for me, but I'd prefer MSP or Chicago's climate. Dallas or Phoenix would be non-starters). Above I-90 would be my preference, but above I-80 would be okay. I'll concede that potholes and rusty cars aren't optimal, but I don't feel like most midwestern highways are all that much worse than their southern counterparts.

[kernals12]

I loathe the cold. And from any rational viewpoint, you should too. It's expensive, bringing lots of problems that have no equivalent on the side of heat. I call it the "Frost Tax". Here's what it consists of:

-The Cost of Snow Removal
-The Cost of Warm Clothing
-The Cost of Natural Gas and Heating Oil
-The Cost of Snow Tires
-The Cost of Vehicles with All Wheel Drive
-The Cost of Engineering buildings to withstand the weight of snow
-Damage to highways by freeze thaw cycles
-Water pollution from road salt
-Closure of schools and businesses by snowstorms
-Disruption of airport operations by snowstorms
-Deaths from Hypothermia
-Car accidents from black ice
-Injuries from slipping on ice
-Seasonality of agriculture, construction, and tourism

We all pay the frost tax in obscure ways. Last week, in anticipation of a major snowstorm, I pulled my wipers away from my windshield, and in the process I stripped one of them. Getting a new one cost $70 and due to the post office's current problems, it's days late, so I've been driving with one wiper.

Maybe climate change isn't so bad.

Interesting take, though I can't say I agree with much of it (as a passionate winter-lover).

Here's one opposing Minnesotan perspective...

-We have ~$100 gas bills to heat 3500sf in the coldest months (not at all unreasonable IMHO). We'd certanly spend more to cool an equivalent house in the south, and most of those houses need heat anyway...
-The clothing I own isn't probably that different from what I'd own if I lived in Dallas or OKC. I mean, you're still going to need pants and long sleeves for the winter. I have a jacket with a removable liner, boots and gloves. No big deal.
-I drive a FWD car with all-season tires, and can get around just fine for the vast majority of the winter. No AWD needed - no added cost there.
-I've never broken a wiper blade due to the cold, but I usually spend around $15 on them anyway. (Also, it seems wiper blades last longer in cold climates anyway!)
-There's no clear connection between winter weather and traffic fatalities. In fact, many of the most dangerous states to drive in are in the south.
-We have a ~15 year old $500 snowblower that's never broken down. It uses about $5 in gas per winter, less than our mower uses in gas each summer. The cost of personal snow removal is pretty negligible. Oh, $10 in rock salt a year too.
-MnDOT is pretty good at cleaning up after snows, so travel disruptions seldom last for more than a day or two after larger storms.
-This point is of course personal preference, but I love each of our four seasons. I'm always ready for the next one, even winter. And I'm never more excited than during the first snow of the season. Even so, the first 60-degree day of spring? Bliss. For me, it's all about the contrast and the change.
-Other than SoCal, there aren't many places with great year-round weather anyway. I'd take the cold over the heat, but some have the opposite perspective.
-We adapt. While people everywhere love to talk about their locale's extreme weather, life pretty much just goes on no matter where you are.



I grew up, and still live for part of the year, in southern Minnesota (~40 inches of snow/year) and am going to school in eastern Nebraska (~30 inches/year).  I greatly prefer places with consistently cold, snowy winters to those south of there (I dislike the brown look of lower-midwestern winter). I wouldn't want to live anywhere getting less snow than that, and would likely not even consider places that don't get at least a few snows a year (Albuquerque or Asheville might be okay for me, but I'd prefer MSP or Chicago's climate. Dallas or Phoenix would be non-starters). Above I-90 would be my preference, but above I-80 would be okay. I'll concede that potholes and rusty cars aren't optimal, but I don't feel like most midwestern highways are all that much worse than their southern counterparts.

It wasn't the blade, it was the arm, which is much more expensive.

[hbelkins]

It wasn't the blade, it was the arm, which is much more expensive.

OK, that answered my question about why it cost so much, but wouldn't an auto parts store carry it, or be able to get it? Many of the auto parts chains rely on their own distribution networks,  instead of the USPS or commercial carriers, and shouldn't have been subject to shipping delays.

My wife mailed her aunt in Ypsilanti a Christmas present on Dec. 12. The package is still stuck in Detroit. Several of her Poshmark sales were hung up in Louisville for ages and still haven't arrived despite being sent Priority 2- or 3-day Mail.

[kernals12]

It wasn't the blade, it was the arm, which is much more expensive.

OK, that answered my question about why it cost so much, but wouldn't an auto parts store carry it, or be able to get it? Many of the auto parts chains rely on their own distribution networks,  instead of the USPS or commercial carriers, and shouldn't have been subject to shipping delays.

My wife mailed her aunt in Ypsilanti a Christmas present on Dec. 12. The package is still stuck in Detroit. Several of her Poshmark sales were hung up in Louisville for ages and still haven't arrived despite being sent Priority 2- or 3-day Mail.

Nope, they're specific to the car model. I had to order it from a dealer in North Attleboro, and I didn't want to make the trip down there, a decision which I very much regret

[thspfc]

I am the 67th reply on December 27 alone. That's the most I've ever seen for a thread in a day.

About the hatred of cold weather, I hate hot weather way more so I don't complain when it's cold. I consider myself lucky to live in a place that has four seasons, instead of a place that only has "hot".

[kernals12]

Survey says, by a 2-1 margin, that Americans prefer warmth to cold
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2009/03/18/most-like-it-hot/

[webny99]

Survey says, by a 2-1 margin, that Americans prefer warmth to cold
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2009/03/18/most-like-it-hot/

If you framed it as humid vs cool, that margin would be reversed.

[thspfc]

Survey says, by a 2-1 margin, that Americans prefer warmth to cold
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2009/03/18/most-like-it-hot/

And this is supposed to make me change my opinion?

Can I put an end to this? Stop touting your personal opinion like it's the Bible. Some of us like it when it's not blistering hot and that's okay.

[kernals12]

Survey says, by a 2-1 margin, that Americans prefer warmth to cold
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2009/03/18/most-like-it-hot/

And this is supposed to make me change my opinion?

Can I put an end to this? Stop touting your personal opinion like it's the Bible. Some of us like it when it's not blistering hot and that's okay.

Neither do I. But I can comfortably handle 80 degrees.

[Max Rockatansky]

Survey says, by a 2-1 margin, that Americans prefer warmth to cold
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2009/03/18/most-like-it-hot/

If you framed it as humid vs cool, that margin would be reversed.

Humidity plus heat is the Devil's brew.  I handled it in many a Florida Summer but I have no interest in it ever again.

[kernals12]

What really pissed me off was back in February when we had that freakishly mild winter and the only thing the media seemed to care about was the plight of skiers.

[Max Rockatansky]

What really pissed me off was back in February when we had that freakishly mild winter and the only thing the media seemed to care about was the plight of skiers.

Yeah, screw those skiers and their snow loving ways!