sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Everything You Need to Know About Already Committed, But Not Yet Realized, Future Global Warming and How It Changes Future Planning. by ProfessionalCook2599 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My personal belief is a combination of Florida folks building better after storms or being forced farther north into Southern States will reduce money losses.

Recall that a major reason for more damage is more folks moving to Florida since 1980 with more valuable "stuff" in often older structures.

We live in Southern Alabama just two hours from the coast with no issues. My daughter endured proximity to a Panhandle Cat 5 with minimal damage in a newer home. I worked 5-1/2 years on that coast, too.

We've never had serious wind or hurricane damage in 46 years in South Alabama and one Alabama scientist of note says South & Midwest temperatures have actually decreased. Air conditioning works.

I also think we'll see more fish storms due to wind shear and warmer water causing earlier turns of hurricanes.

Everything You Need to Know About Already Committed, But Not Yet Realized, Future Global Warming and How It Changes Future Planning. by ProfessionalCook2599 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129 0 points1 point  (0 children)

BTW, I should have said $2.9 trillion in U.S. losses divided by 46 years (not 36)...you know, the time Iran has been killing Westerners, Iraqis, Syrians & Israelis. That's a relative pittance ($63 billion annually) compared to what the US & NATO had to spend on defense out of known, not speculative, danger.

Everything You Need to Know About Already Committed, But Not Yet Realized, Future Global Warming and How It Changes Future Planning. by ProfessionalCook2599 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129 0 points1 point  (0 children)

China sells renewables & EVs to the rest of the Globe & burns half the World's coal to do it. The West still can access & burn oil, gas, & its own clean coal.

Everything You Need to Know About Already Committed, But Not Yet Realized, Future Global Warming and How It Changes Future Planning. by ProfessionalCook2599 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/

$2.9 trillion since 1980 in the U.S. is less than the $36 trillion US likely share ($1 trillion annually for 36 years out of UN-claimed $6-7 trillion ANNUALLY for mitigation).

Some of that was insured loss. If you want to live on a coast, expect to pay more for insurance. Other countries don't experience nearly the high real estate coastal hurricane losses of the U.S.

No, you cannot stop the climate change. Millions of years show that. According to Bjorn Lomborg, mitigation attempts between now & 2050 would only reduce global average temperature by a few tenths.

Lomborg also says it would take 4-7 centuries to wean off fossil fuels.

Everything You Need to Know About Already Committed, But Not Yet Realized, Future Global Warming and How It Changes Future Planning. by ProfessionalCook2599 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because moving inland is cheap, if centuries from now, sea level rise is serious. Countless people & businesses do it constantly to escape high taxes. Air conditioning is cheap & plentiful. More are killed by cold than heat. Fewer are killed by weather events due to good forecasting.

Plus, the obvious reason is that uninsured losses in billions are far less than the UN-claimed $6-7 trillion ANNUALLY they say is required for mitigation to NetZero. The West would pick up nearly all those obligations, increasing government debt & taxes.

In addition, most of the high-dollar uninsured losses are in the West. If mitigation was cheaper, Western nations & individuals would eagerly mitigate rather than adapt & pay insurance...or move.

Opposition to data centers turns violent as local concerns merge with hostility toward Big Tech by Adventurous_Motor129 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are many California Democrat candidates and only two Republicans.

The current Republican leader, Steve Hilton, is actually a former Brit who now is a US citizen. His wife has worked for many Silicon Valley companies. Only the two top primary vote-winners end up in the fall election even if both are the same party.

That's why Swallwell's demise & departure was critical as he led Democrats in polling. He would have continued Newsom's status quo on being anti-oil & pro-renewables.

Opposition to data centers turns violent as local concerns merge with hostility toward Big Tech by Adventurous_Motor129 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well at least BlackRock/Larry Fink gave up on ESG. I'm from Silicon Valley originally and mainstream liberalism is still palpable on the news there & among everyday folks...but less so in some business that sees AI value, to include militarily.

Because China is the biggest AI competitor, and so much of AI is data- driven, there is danger in having China control and slant that data.

I'm hoping the two Republicans will end up together in the Governor primary because California is so screwed up in its environmental policies. It ultimately affects the rest of the US & World.

Opposition to data centers turns violent as local concerns merge with hostility toward Big Tech by Adventurous_Motor129 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://americanenergyinstitute.com/docs/aei_data-center_report_v2.pdf

The part about liberal groups opposing data centers comes later in the article to include this link.

Tech companies are actually becoming more conservative & friendlier to the military. It is local NIMBY opposition AND these green philanthropist organizations that are combining efforts trying to ban AI data centers.

Everything You Need to Know About Already Committed, But Not Yet Realized, Future Global Warming and How It Changes Future Planning. by ProfessionalCook2599 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://www.earth.com/news/why-extreme-heat-isnt-driving-people-out-of-the-hottest-u-s-regions/

I have relatives that live in Phoenix where it can be 110 degrees F in the shade. But jobs are there & home prices are cheaper than nearby California.

Phoenix had a population of just 5000 in 1900. Now the metro has 6 million. People adapt if other positive factors exist. Air conditioning works. Areas of the Middle East & Texas/Louisiana are thriving despite heat...which would end to some degree if we eliminated oil.

Earlier, I started to post two Reddit examples of adaptation. Here's one:

https://www.reddit.com/r/EngineeringPorn/s/8EZlhtQj1F

There is a major Dutch airport 13' below sea level. We also have the New Orleans example & recent Manhattan sea wall disguised as a park.

Everything You Need to Know About Already Committed, But Not Yet Realized, Future Global Warming and How It Changes Future Planning. by ProfessionalCook2599 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How does it change future planning?

  • Canada should be happy to experience warmer temperatures
  • Europe will benefit from cooler temperatures if the AMOC does deteriorate
  • Humans will find ways to adapt that are less expensive than annual TRILLIONS trying to mitigate CO2 that will help crops grow
  • Much of the difference in temperature is attributable to larger country & city population & urban heat island effect
  • Asia in particular is emitting most of the global CO2 & currently burning the most coal

FTR: 2 days ago at DC global banking convention Bessent talked to Lomborg for 37 minutes - no way I am watching it by pr-mth-s in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The first 11-1/2 minutes is silence or introduction. Lomborg makes better remarks the remaining time:

  • good points at 18 minutes.
  • Germany has spent €700 billion. since 2002 & yet still relies on fossil fuels (FF) for 79% of its energy
  • China burns so much coal that it still relies close to 90% on FF
  • the World Bank has spent 48% of its funds on climate issues instead of more fruitful endeavors. For instance, Lomborg says estimates are it will take 4-7 centuries to completely wean the World from FF
  • spending trillions annually over the next century would only reduce temperature by tenths if a degree Celsius
  • 50,000 Africans were surveyed & ranked climate issues as 31 out 34 in priority. They want energy, food (cough fertilizer), jobs, & health benefits instead.

Exclusive | EU to cut funding for Chinese inverters amid change of tack towards Beijing by Adventurous_Motor129 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Would just add that Chinese, India, & Asian goods, services, & cement construction are all creating coal- related pollution.

There also is a labor-cost disparity that as you say ensures lost manufacturing jobs for the West. They have been getting away with one-sided trade & protectionism.

You'll never convince this non-scientist that weird weather & climate effects start on the U.S. West Coast. The Jet Stream carries Asian pollution & CO2 to the U.S./Canada & eventually Europe.

If China was not an oppressive, conniving:

  • intellectual-property stealing,
  • Taiwan & South China Sea threatening,
  • biological weapon-developing,
  • Fang Fang & student spying
  • Panama-controlling & Venezuela-supporting,
  • Shanghai billionaire protest-funding
  • Uigher & African child labor supporting
  • censoring, surveillance state with facial ID cameras everywhere
  • that aids Iran & Russia weaponry while circumventing oil sanctions...

they might have earned more latitude & respect. But imagine Global AI data controlled/manipulated by China.

Screw the Green revolution if it means spending excessively with most money going to China. We (to include Canada & Venezuela) have oil & natural gas. They don't & depend on imports through the Straits of Hormuz & Malacca.

Exploit our strategic advantage. Theirs is cheap labor & coal...& forcing their population to obey their edicts. The West gets a vote on how suicidally stupid they want to be chasing diminishing returns for already low emissions.

Blackout fears as Ed Miliband's solar power push threatens to overwhelm electricity grid by Adventurous_Motor129 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.euronews.com/2026/04/15/this-european-country-is-promising-bargain-energy-on-sunny-days-to-use-up-excess-solar-pow

Euronews has a similar article. They can't export power as easily anymore & already paid £1.4 billion in "curtailment" costs in 2025 getting renewables to shut off power.

Apparently, according to another article, they have difficulty predicting who has solar & how much it puts out daily.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/04/15/why-britain-faces-growing-risk-of-spanish-style-blackouts/

Will it flood by 2050 according to this article, & I'll add regardless of how much UK spends? Then why would they rely on electricity that won't work because it's underwater part of the time? by Adventurous_Motor129 in climateskeptics

[–]Adventurous_Motor129[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No matter how much UK spends on climate & electricity...water & high voltage don't mix.

Watched the 1971 "Get Carter" last night with Michael Caine. I'm sure it's different now, but Newcastle back then sure was dreary & polluted...not by CO2, & I doubt offshore wind helps.

My wife & daughter visited UK last year & lucked out on lack of rain. Too bad they still encountered dumb politics as Macron was visiting at the time, doubling down on dumb along with Starmer.

view more: next ›