Comments on: Managing catastrophic risks and climate change

By: j

Wed, 31 Mar 2010 20:32:51 +0000

What is going on with the National media?
The Vermont Yankee Nuclear power plant up until a few weeks ago was leaking radioactive Tritium into the Connecticut river and NOBODY SAYS A WORD. The ground around the plant is contaminated with radioactive CESIUM and still NOT A PEEP! Have the powers that be acquired so much clout that they can influence the National scene to this extent?

By: Mark Robertson

Mark Robertson — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 18:30:56 +0000

If we are wrong about climate change then life is okay, if we are correct and it is happening then life as we know it will change dramatically.
Climate change in the past has happened fast and had horrible consequences for this planets organisms including people. The periods such as the Younger Dryas, and more recently the medieval Little Ice Age were not good for many people.

By: Gamini Gunasekera - Mendis

Gamini Gunasekera - Mendis — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:49:32 +0000

Saving the Earth is everyone’s agenda. Understanding how to educate the Global Mass on Climate Change is seemingly nobody’s ambition. Recent natural disasters in Chile and Haiti reflects the capabilities of their disaster management efforts. What I think that we should focus on a P R O M P T – R E S C U E protocol financed by each and every culprit nations of Global Warming, chartered and governed by a world body like WHO .. We all are forced to adopt and live with this phenomenon named Climate Change while adjusting ourselves into more Greener Living ..

By: Jimmer XXX

Jimmer XXX — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:19:38 +0000

The result of climate change will be a gradually increasing movement of populations to more amenable areas. We already see this in economic migration, but this is a fairly harmless example. What may happen are a series of wars over the years where entire populations of countries move in on others. It has happened in the past, therefore it is safe to say it will happen again. Not something that can be insured against with cash, should an invader come upon you and maybe it is you who will be the one wanting to be doing the moving!

By: Bob Irving

Bob Irving — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 09:56:51 +0000

Another side of the coin is that if we de-carbonise our systems to reduce climate change and extreme climate change does not happen, we end up with a cleaner, less-polluted environment. How bad is that? It might cost us some money, but I think we ought to do it anyway.

By: Dean

Dean — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:31:41 +0000

Managing catastrophic risk is a hard problem, and most people get it wrong. Because the value factor in the risk picture is “all of it”, all probabilistic computations blow up and give wrong answers, even ones that try to account for long tails. (Think of division by zero.)

In addition to recovery planning for the almost worst case, where you still survive, catastrophic risks should be managed by reducing the magnitude of the worst case. Partition and distribute your resources so that any single event doesn’t cause you to lose everything. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

If there’s no place to hide some of your resources — there’s only one planet for us, after all — then you have two choices: do everything you can to prevent the event from happening, or deny the risk entirely. Free-market advocates are willing to risk the collapse of 20th and 21st century civilization to preserve their faith.

Climate change won’t cause extinction of Homo sapiens, but it will lead to catastrophic consequences for billions of us. “Not a problem” for denialists, though.

By: Dave Evans

Dave Evans — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:31:31 +0000

Wouldnt co2 from the deep ocean,turn into carbolic acid before ever reaching the atmosphere?
Do people realise concrete absorbs co2,turning it into calcium carbonate?

By: Dave Evans

Dave Evans — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 02:23:54 +0000

Why has NASA held the FUEL-CELL patent 30 years? Why have they debunked anyone suggesting alternative fuels? Why did the imf bank set up the UN? Money money money! If the establishment cared,we wouldnt be discussing this.All that is happening,is a cashing in on peoples reluctance to DO something,rather than be lied to.I cant live with liars.Lies are destructive,more than any emmisions.Carbon Monoxide would be a better debate,this debate on co2 is bogus.

By: Dave Evans

Dave Evans — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:48:11 +0000

Oh dear, its looking like the citizens are not buying one iotta of the nonsense rhetoric from the government. I didnt give the UN any authority over me, i do not recognise them as an authority, merely fascist gangsters who think theyre in charge.

By: KJ Bacon

KJ Bacon — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:51:05 +0000

I am no expert, but you stated that Chile was better prepared to deal with earthquakes than Haiti. A quick look at epicenters on Google Earth will reveal that the Chilean quake occurred in a sparsely populated area, and the Haitian quake directly under a city adjoining the capital city. Don’t you think that might have been a factor in the human destruction in the two countries? I certainly do.