Basically... how fucked are we? With the recent results of the election, I've been feeling like life is pretty bleak as of now. I'm turning 20 soon, I have yet to start my career and family, yet I feel like there's no point anymore. One of the few things that gave me a respite from daily life was the wilderness. Seems like we're losing that all too soon. I'm not sure, I just feel so depressed with the state of the world and global politics, like there's no point in trying in this life if it'll all turn out into some hellscape.

Nowhere is going to be without effects. But everyone says the Great Lakes and the Northeast are the places to go for dampened effects. Yet, with rising temps comes more poisonous algae blooms. Walking around the lakes in Minnesota will reveal that the colors are already turning that toxic blue/green color. You’re never quite sure if it’s safe or not. The Northeast is also susceptible to major flooding, like in New Hampshire most recently. Plus look at Asheville, NC. What people thought were havens were actually very vulnerable.

So, let’s take a look at Colorado again, purely in the climate sense. Take water for example. Yes, they’re dry and the Colorado river is going to be a problem. The snow pack is going to dwindle, and there’s a greater chance of heavy rain. But they’re the headwaters of the river and get the freshest “drink” before it flows down towards Mexico. With xeriscaping, water reclamation, and conservation they may be fairly resilient to water scarcity. No?

What about wildfires and air quality. Seems like that’s inevitable. But Colorado is placing a lot of resources into forest management now. Thinning the forests, controlled burns, climate tech for prediction and rapid responses. Plus most states are exposed to the air quality issues if you haven’t noticed. Something burns in Canada and the jet stream wafts the smoke all other the Midwest. It burns in California, and Utah and Colorado get it too. So on, and so forth.

They’ve got the elevation so extreme heat is less likely to be devastating. It’s dry, so less likely wet bulb conditions. No real tornadoes (at least on the Western side) due to the mountains and the shifting of tornado alley Southeast. No sea level rise or hurricanes. Elevation kills off a lot of the more-dangerous pests (except the mountain pine beetle, but see above for wildfires). Less AMOC/jet stream woes.

Plus it seems like it's turning into a climate tech center. Should Colorado be considered up there as a climate haven? What have I not considered, or am wrong about? Prove me wrong.

Im not any type of scientist, but i like to think pragmatically. I keep thinking about how likely it is we're going to meet the goals of reducing emissions by 2030 are and I wonder, in the event which we don't meet that goal, what would need to happen to revert the global temperature down from 3.6⁰F if we surpass that threshold?

We talk about the 2030 and 2050 deadlines being the "point of no return" and not much beyond that. It's gonna get worse, people will die, damage will be done, I understand that. But I have a hard time believing there would be nothing else we can do past the end of the decade.

I know there's gotta be some sort of game plan for this scenario. How off course will we be and what do we need to do to improve things?

Starmer claims government can reach new carbon target without people's everyday lives being disrupted

Q: [From the Times] Is it really realistic to think you can hit your new carbon target without any change to how people live their everyday lives?

Starmer said this was realistic. He replied:

If you fulfil the criteria and you would like to take part, please email: 2406384@brunel.ac.uk.

Would you describe yourself as worried about the environment? 

I am inviting volunteers to take part in a research study about how people who are worried about the environment cope. 

This research forms part of an MSc Psychological Sciences degree at Brunel University London and involves participating in an online 30–60-minute interview via Zoom regarding your experiences of eco-anxiety and how you cope. 

This study has been approved by the College of Health, Medicine, and Life Science Research Ethics Committee. 

Your participation in this research is entirely voluntary, anonymous, and confidential and you can withdraw any time before or during the interview, and 24 hours after the interview takes place without having to give a reason. 

I am sorry I can’t offer any payment or rewards! 

 Still interested?

All participants must be over 18, and are worried about the environment

Thank you!

https://scitechdaily.com/startling-new-research-reveals-that-microplastics-could-be-changing-earths-climate/

One more thing that plastic is doing

I lived in Argentina between 2019 and 2022 and my friends there always told me that the Patagonia is sparsely populated so I think for trying to find a place to live given current forecasts of climate change its a good place:

What do you guys think about Patagonia? Will its soil be better than today? Feel free to mention anything else about it

I haven't seen much attention given to it and I feel it could be a good spot to settle, plus, there are already places like Puerto Madryn and Ushuaia there which are near the ocean.

I feel like so much bandwidth is spend on climate doomerism. The only opinions I see out there are, “climate change is a hoax” and “we’re all gonna die or live in mad max in 30 years”.

Aren’t there promising technologies and improvements being made and implemented? Do you think there’s any utility in focusing on those things?

I have a friend who claims "climate change agnostic" because they feel they don't know anything about it. They watch what they see on the news, but don't necessarily know what to make of it, what it means, or how to solve it. I told them I would put together some videos and podcasts to outline the major effects, the predicted effects, contributors, etc. So, fellow redditors, what are the best resources for beginners to go through in video or podcast format on climate change? Thanks!

I've realised my knowledge of climate change is quite poor, so I'm trying to understand some of the arguments and resources out there.

The first point of this Greenpeace article pushes against nuclear power because doubling the capacity of nuclear power worldwide in 2050, would only decrease greenhouse gas emissions by around 4%.

In other words, it's effectively arguing we wouldn't be able to build enough nuclear power stations to replace the existing coal/oil/gas ones in time.

I can therefore only assume that the solar and wind options it suggests are substantially easier to build (which makes sense), and that we can build enough of these in time to bring the emissions down.

But is there anything which outlines how many solar/wind sources we'd need to build to replace the existing dirty options? And that this is definitely feasible?

I’ve spent the past week talking to people about the recent US election—trying to figure out, in particular, why people voted for Trump.

One thing I’ve noticed is that people are trusting propaganda that visibly conflicts with reality. For example, many people told me they voted for Trump because they didn’t like how Kamala “prioritized transgender issues while neglecting working people.” When I reminded them that Harris didn’t run on trans issues, and in fact avoided the topic entirely, they continued to believe whatever bullshit right-wing media had fed them.

How do we deal with this?

I’m concerned about the consequences for climate change because, although the scientific consensus is very clear on this subject—and although the average person has actually begun to feel the effects of climate change where they live—people have shown that they’re willing to completely disregard reality in favor of what the TV says. And what the TV is saying is that climate change is a hoax, that it’s an attempt by global “elites” to usher in communism by penalizing businesses, etc.

It’s not just a lack of education, as I previously thought; it’s a complete refusal to digest empirical facts.

What is the way forward?

What would a US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement really mean? Its targets are voluntary, inadequate, and not being met anyway.

I’ve been thinking about climate change (thank you Trump) and the future of the planet. I’ve read through many posts on this sub but have trouble really piecing the pieces together

How would like really differ from now in the future, let’s say in 2050-2090? Will we who are alive right now really feel the impact of climate change? How hard will the changes hit us and in what ways will our lives change?

From what I gather, rising sea levels will be a concern for my country (Singapore), as well as increasing temperatures. How will things like food scarcity affect the world on a global scale? Are there any other things I am not factoring in?

This also does make me hesitant on ‘living in the now’ as I have been doing so my entire 20+ years of existing. How can one really prepare for the future?

Thank you in advance for your replies! Looking forward to reading them

Australia was always my end up location but it'll be scorching hot.

Canada too but Forrest fires. Same for Scandinavia. Also both too close to Russia RE geopolitics chaos.

Northern UK seemed idea but the shit down of the North Atlantic Current will mean icy cold winters.

What's peoples thoughts?

I'm UK based so currently thinking... Stay in the UK but invest in the most energy efficient house possible, and get somewhere with land for growing crops and firewood.

I apologize if this is hopelessly naive, but it's an honest question I've been grappling in the wake of the incoming Trump administration. If our government isn't going to do anything, and actively make things worse, is there any amount of effort from everyday people that could improve things by any significant amount? Of course, I also understand that would require people to willingly participate in such measures, which based on this election and general behavior in the US, is not something many will do. I feel like the issue of combatting climate change is a reflection of the worst aspects of American culture: our greed, short-sightedness, and obsession with consumption. Everywhere you look, on every platform, there are ads trying to get you to part with your money for something you probably don't need. We consume wasteful products and seek novelty in cheap goods instead of other, healthier methods. And it doesn't even make us happier in most cases! We keep chasing happiness from something that will never grant it and trashes the planet in the process. I know a lot of messaging around climate change centers on fear and anxiety, and understandably given the enormity of what is happening and what is at stake. But would changing the messaging help at all in getting more people on board? Like pointing out the personal positives of changing habits: saving money from unnecessary expenses, saving money buying second hand, using products better for your personal health, simplifying life and finding joy in it, less clutter, etc?