/midpol/ - Politically (Mis)Informed

>>759

first point is kinda moot, since America forgot to catch up on backburning earlier in this century, which explained the 50's fires

Hotter conditions will affect fires by upping intensity, and due to things like a larger population = more arson, drought, and the Eucalyptus plague in south-west (noone cares about those faggots anyways), if shit's gonna go down, it's bye bye for economy

However, hot conditions also bring phenomena that lower fire incidences (lower amount of strong storms w/ lightning, rain), but I would rather stay on the safe side, and try to limit the effect of heat on forests

One possible short-term solution would be very rigorous, and often backburning operations, but they may not be as efficient as they require man-hours and reduce biodiversity

also a reminder that climate change is a better choice than global warming, because although the change is caused by trapped heat from the greenhouse effect, it may actually reduce temps in certain areas.

I still believe that it is clear that climate change causes MUCH more erratic behaviour in comparison to the global climate pre-industrial age

another problem is the positive feedback loop caused by "better infrastructure"

Of course, the infrastructure needs to be in place at some point, but in the production of materials for said infrastructure, more greenhouse gases will be produced. More greenhouse gases will increase severity of the storms, which will require

A. repairs to existing infrastructure

and

B. better infrastructure, yet again

this creates more waste and more greenhouse gases, which continues

A responsible solution would be to lessen the greenhouse effect somehow, while simultaneously improving infrastructure

don't be a boolean dummy

the earth isn't made of ones and zeroes

There is also the issue (or non-issue) of some environments changing for the better.

Like desert areas getting more rain, colder temperatures.

Climate change isn't necessarily a bad thing. Earth's climate always changes every so often regardless of us humans.

However it would be a problem if it changed so dramatically that species en masse would become extinct and ruin ecosystems everywhere.

>>769

well, that's the problem with "lefty" global warming

it's killing fuck tons of coral, which in turn kills all the tropical fishies

no more nemos

also sharks are getting wasted by stupid islander fisherman, but that's another story

I think Man is Man's biggest problem.

>Wars

>nuclear meltdowns

>harrp

>cern

>pollution

We are definitely going to blow ourselves up.