Slo-mo Katrina

Images courtesy Mike Blum via NASA (a representation of the predicted results of sea-level rise, subsidence and added sediment for the Mississippi Delta region for 2100)

I had already read and starred this article from The Guardian earlier, but the above graphic from National Geographic struck me as a... well, umm... very graphic portrayal of the results of denialism. Krugman lays it on pretty heavily in today's column. In terms of science results, he's not laying out anything that's really new to me... but then I'm a science nerd. This is an issue I follow pretty closely, and I have been feeling more and more panicky about the situation. There doesn't seem to be a broad public understanding that however bad the climatic forecasts were 4 or 5 years ago, the research and modeling, along with a torrent of new data, have led climatologists to revise their planetary prognosis from grim to much worse.

It's not that there's no good news; here's an example from yesterday, about how the Chinese are developing the technology to route the exhaust from coal burning through what amount to algae reactors. The algae can then be farmed as a source of both biofuel and animal feed. I know parallel research with algae is going on in a number of countries, including the US. Good idea, but there's a lot left unsaid. Algae and other photosynthetic organisms need lots of nutrients in addition to the raw ingredients of CO2 and water... how are those supplied? How close is this to being practical?

And that's the thing that terrifies me: what we have already done has created more damage than we even thought possible a few years ago. Five years ago it looked like a 4 degree (F) rise over the course of this century. Now it looks like 9 degrees. Over the last two summers, the meltback of the Arctic ice sheet has approached or exceded ranges predicted for mid century, and exceded ranges predicted for the end of the century by a number of more optimistic models. And it doesn't look, to me at least, as if we're within a decade, or even two, of having practical, widely available and widely implemented alternatives to dumping CO2 into the air.

In short, we're about 50 years further along in the process of climate change than we figured we'd be only five years ago. And not a bit closer to realistically addressing it.

We had plenty of information 20 years ago to indicate that this was an area that demanded not just more confirmative research, but active development of mitigation technologies. And here we are, 20 years later, twiddling our thumbs as our home burns, still listening to jackasses like Representative Paul Broun (R-Ga), and not just accepting his dementia, but applauding it:

Here's my bottom line: I will not experience the full consequences of what we have done, and continue to do, to our planet and its inhabitants. I'm not particularly healthy, and I will be quite surprised if I live to see 2020. I'm at peace with that. But it seems to me that most people, particularly those younger than me, would like to live long, healthy and comfortable lives. And, I would assume, most parents hope for the same for their children.

People, unless we figure out how to live sustainably, and in the next few years, there ain't a chance in hell of that happening. What you're buying into is hell on earth. Traitors indeed.