Killer heatwaves

This is major. If we go past 2 degrees, 3 BILLION people will face killer heatwaves that last a few days, weeks or even a month or two each year. Farmers, builders and other outside workers will just have to take the week off and live inside in the air-conditioning. And they’d better hope they have the best in passive thermal designed homes and offices, because if the power goes off that could be game over.

This entry was posted in CLIMATE & CONSERVATION, Heatwaves, New Urbanism. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Killer heatwaves

  1. john49zt says:

    Dave – what is your opinion about statistically predicted sunspot activity? My research suggests that there is no need to lose any sleep about global warming. The many IPCC computer models cannot take into account sunspot activity We are approaching a grand solar minimum I.e, the concern for humanity is not global warming, but global cooling We are rapidly heading towards another ice age. That is something to worry about

    • Eclipse Now says:

      The first question is what causes ice ages? The second question is why do you think climatologists forgot to study sun cycles? The third question is why do you think that those qualified to comment on climate science – the climatologists in consultation with astronomers and solar experts – could possibly miss such an important phenomenon? The fourth question is have you looked at the history of CO2 science and who discovered it traps heat and when? Seriously – the study of atmosphere and how it traps heat starts with Joseph Fourier nearly 200 years ago and picks up speed decades later when Eunice Foote discovered CO2’s role. In 1856 – 165 years ago!

      It absolutely defies credulity to argue that CO2’s influence on our atmosphere could have been ‘faked’ by a ‘conspiracy’ through a variety of world changing wars and and the rise and fall of empires.

      Finally, if you find you don’t have answers to any of the above, maybe it’s time to stop thinking you know more than the experts?
      Try this guy. He’s usually pretty spot on and represents the actual written peer-reviewed science quite well.

      But I know you won’t bother. Last time we did this over on your ironically labelled “Truth Storm” I answered 20 something questions and I doubt you read one link. You even admitted that you just were not interested in what the real science said, and didn’t that make you an interesting philosophical conundrum? Talk about navel gazing!

      The interesting thing is that more objective lurkers reading this conversation have been known to read the links, discover that the science is consistent, old, repeatable, demonstrable, and verifiable – and be won over by climate science.

  2. Eclipse Now says:

    Here we are a week later. How did you go with answers to the questions above? Surely when you asked the question, you intended to hang around and research the answers? Or is this just another cliché case of a climate denier caught in a drive-by-shooting? Just another post and run?
    The reality is a ‘grand’ solar minimum is only 0.25 watts / m2 less out of 1362 watts / m2. This is compared to the 3 watts extra / m2 that our CO2 is trapping, which works out equivalent to trapping 4 Hiroshima bombs extra heat across the planet EVERY SECOND OF EVERY DAY.

    The solar minimum is 0.018% less energy during a minimum as opposed to the maximum.

    I have no idea how you ‘calculated’ that the grand solar minimum would solve climate change – but you got it wrong. Pardon me for being blunt – but you’re obviously an oil and gas man – and not someone I should be getting my climate headlines from anytime soon.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s