Thread 16841530

Global change of climate leading to more extreme weather events around the equator is going to destroy this region and will lead to economic growth of the global north.

We shoud take the climate accelerionist pill, because climate change benefits the whites, so long as we dont accept climate refugees.
China and India are going under. Why is no one talking about this?

Picrel is showing social cost of carbon, computed from projected GDP impacts of climate change, such is lower life expectancy, lower agricultural yields, weather damages...


https://sci-hub.se/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0282-y

>>16841530 (OP)
I'm sympathetic to your argument but there are a few problems that make it not as easy as it sounds.
1) It's unclear (and very very unlikely) that the global climate will behave as a simple linear continuation of what the models project. Especially since the models are essentially bullshit.
2) Traditional pollution is gross and objectively a lot worse for people and nature than greenhouse gases. We'd want to first recolonize the global south in order to sequester all the non greenhouse pollution down there.
3) I think China has the technology to suck CO2 out of the air anyway. So again, we'd need to militarily occupy them and force them to submit.

>>16841561
>We'd want to first recolonize the global south in order to sequester all the non greenhouse pollution down there.
You cant even manage to build up affordable housing stock in developed states lmao. Most energy infrastructure is either underfunded and/or require much needed maintenance right now and you want to "recolonize tbe global south" with pretty much industrial manufacturing to speak of?

>>16841530 (OP)
The massive effects of natural climate change comes from the equatorial population having increased a six-fold in just 100 years.
Global north could have increased it's population as well but chose to increase the quality of life instead.
They have had their wars in the process of making this change and have no responsibility for how the global south now chose to deal with their issues from their own actions.
Blaming climate change and then the northern hemisphere, for their own lack of consequential reasoning is not just. With just a sixth the population density they would be more than good off.

>>16841582
By recolonize I don't mean move there and make it pretty. I mean subjugate or eradicate the local populations and turn the global south into an industrial wasteland that pumps greenhouse into the atmosphere while quarantining the non greenhouse pollutants away from the global north.

>>16841604
Increasing the temperature will slow down the Gulfstream and bring about the approaching glacial era sooner, since the strength of the AMROC depends on the temperature gradient between the equator and north.
Without the warm current the temperature will drop. Although cold water holds more dissolved CO2 it will take time for algea to consume it.

>>16841561
>ad 1
Well, its hard to argue when you say that all of climate predictions are linear and bullshit, when they are a) anything but linear and b) not specifying what model exactly has what high order inacccuracy, CESM2? Looks good to me in for least several years of precitipation modelling https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2025/egusphere-2025-2684/egusphere-2025-2684.pdf. Economical models are much more iffy, sure, but tell me which policy making models arent. I still dont think we can lose with RCP8.5.

Ad 2) I agree and I dont want acid rains anywhere but in china, yet I dont think we can just move all manufacturing there because you cant run on service sector only. And I have to hand to the chinks that peking air is not visible anymore on a good day. Environmental technology has gone a long way since the 80s and we can have, if not clean, then at least not as dirty industry, with sulphur scrubbers, soil testing and EIAs.

Ad 3) CO2 sucking is greenwashing psyop. Literally money and energy burning. Also you can just exhaust more than they do, but look at their industry and tell me thats needed.

>>16841561
>3) I think China has the technology to suck CO2 out of the air anyway.
Carbon scrubbing directly at the exhausts is done at far to few places.
If China as the world's biggest manufacturer could implement it to a larger extent it would have a significant impact.

>>16841614
Temperatures wont drop and europe wont freeze. As you say, AMOC will stop because there wont be a gradient, and that wont be there, because the seas will get hotter, not colder (AMOC is hot water from americas getting cooled in the european north). It lowers its activity during summers and increases it during winters. Without it, winters will be colder and summer hotter. Unpleasant, but not catastrophic.
https://amocscenarios.org/?lat=80.5&lon=-1.5&model=cc_RCP85&is_amoc_on=false&is_delta=true&metric=temp_2m_djf

>>16841642
>not catastrophic
Agriculture and fishing will fail.
Whole ecosystems will need to adapt.
Infrastructure will need to be redesigned.
A 15 degree temperature drop IS catastrophic.

>>16841642
https://www.arcticiceproject.org/the-looming-threat-what-happens-if-the-gulf-stream-shuts-down/

>>16841645
>>16841658
That page has a) vested interest in making gulf stream collapse scarier b) no source on that 15 degree figure besides guardian article with no values and c) please see >>16841642 and https://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/gs/index.shtml which show that changes would be much less drastic.

>>16841645
Also while fishing and agriculture may take a hit at south and west with warming(!) seas, ton of fertile land will get warmer in the baltic area. You win some, you lose some.

>>16841679
>ton of fertile land will get warmer in the baltic area
Not likely. Also the expansion of pests, disease ranges and shit like malaria.

>>16841604
That's just being a psychotic technocrat. Keep that shit in the states.

>>16841601
The vast majority of pollution comes from the global north.

>>16841795
I'm not advocating it. I'm sympathetic to OP's argument for being cute and imoing where it's impractical. I don't think climate change can be modeled well enough to be directed in the first place.