Climate Change Significantly Worse Then Feared

In a state where water has become an increasingly scarce commodity, a growing number of farmers are betting they can make more money selling their water supplies to thirsty cities and farms to the south than by growing crops.

The shortages this season among the most intense of the last decade are already shooting water prices skyward in many areas, and Los Angeles-area cities are begging for water and coaxing farmers to let their fields go to dust. As supplies dry up, growers pass on farming and sell water

Expect higher food prices as a result. This has more consequences then food however, as some crops take years to develop to maturity:

Near Bakersfield, the shortages are expected to force some almond and pistachio growers to triage which of their nut trees should survive.

I’m hoping all of my trees survive, I’m counting on having something to eat when they come to maturity. We’ve gotten plenty of snow this year, so we’re good for now.

Here’s yet another warning coming true: Climate Change Significantly Worse Then Feared

DAVOS, Switzerland (AFP) – Climate change is occurring far faster than even the worst predictions of the UN’s Nobel Prize-winning scientific panel on climate change foresaw, Al Gore warned Thursday.

New evidence shows “the climate crisis is significantly worse and unfolding more rapidly than those on the pessimistic side of the IPCC projections had warned us,” the former US vice president and climate campaigner told delegates at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos.

There are now forecasts that the North Pole ice cap may disappear entirely during summer months in as little as five years, Gore said.

“This is a planetary emergency. There has never been anything remotely like it in the entire history of human civilisation. We are putting at risk all of human civilisation,” he added.

And yet another prediction now making headlines: Climate Change Will Lead To War Over Water and Food

Climate change will have a long-term impact on the nation’s security as wars break out over food and water supplies around the world, a report said yesterday.

Hundreds of millions of environmental refugees will seek new places to live, with many of them heading for Britain, according to the report for the Oxford Research Group.

The report said that security services would be challenged increasingly by the number of refugees, and the Government would need to consider stronger border controls. Protests against companies that continued to emit greenhouse gases were possible as climate change intensified and they might even provoke riots.

In other parts of the world the pressures caused by global warming, particularly through changes in rainfall patterns and the disappearance of glaciers, would provoke wars over agriculture and water rights.

This article goes on to say:

It was “almost certain” that, by 2050, droughts, food shortages and flooding would lead to the mass movement of up to 200 million environmental refugees, the paper, An Uncertain Future: Law Enforcement, National Security and Climate Change, said.

I disagree with this, as I’ve recently been sharing, the “scientific reticence” fails to (publicly) estimate how fast we are getting screwed over by climate change. Environmental refugees are happening right now, and war over food and water will occur within 5 – 10 years.

I suspect there is an awful lot of hand-wringing going on by governments and elites, who realize that there really isn’t a thing they can do about this without cutting their own throats. Keeping the slaves, I mean connedsumers consuming is where the money is at. The question for them now becomes:

a) how do we keep our profits flowing?

b) what are we going to do with all of these people we can’t feed anymore?

The answer to both questions has already been reached. Efforts by DuPont, Monsanto, Archer-Daniels, Cargill and others have pretty much taken over the global food supply. Water rights have also now extended to rainfall in many areas. So the answer is obvious: those that survive will pay us dearly for this “right”, the rest will die.

What you won’t see is serious efforts in countries like the United States to mitigate climate change.  All the US does is rearrange the smoke and mirrors belching pollution into the atmosphere.  Dumb-ass ideas like carbon credits will be employed with great fanfare to keep the industrialized and gluttonous nations consuming as fast as ever, while the poor impoverished nations will still be exploited ever worse then before.  In other words,  business-as-usual.  There is NOTHING on the global scene that I have come across yet to indicate that anything has changed.  We are accelerating as predicted to the collapse of civilization.

You have been warned – repeatedly. Although this is a very quick summary, there are a ton of links on this blog regarding where this is all headed. Climate change is the global kill shot for humanity and the kleptocrats are going to take full advantage of it.

admin

admin at survivalacres dot com

10 thoughts on “Climate Change Significantly Worse Then Feared

  • January 26, 2008 at 8:26 am
    Permalink

    Just got one thing to say about that…

    hy-dro-pon-ics

    cheers

  • January 26, 2008 at 9:14 am
    Permalink

    and not just water but soil also
    SEE http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/348200_dirt22.html?source=mypi

    @GIF
    Good luck with resourcing all the required elements (plant nutrient – in water-soluble form no less) especially in an energy starved, hyper-inflating economy and an increasing chaotic sociopolitical (destabilized) world. Got a lifetime supply of chelated Iron, Manganese?, Boron?, etc?  I didnâ’t ‘thinkâ’ so.  As a matter of fact, there isn’t enough water soluble nutrient on the entire planet to feed even Montana for a year, much less to feed the US or the planet – and there never will be – IMIO.  And, dear GIF, I wonâ’t ‘hearâ’ any retort about “Oh, Iâ’ll recycle everything”  – unless youâ’re ‘recyclingâ’ all your feces, family, friends as well as yourself –  in addition to continuous external resourcing – and even then your kids and theirs are in trouble. With or without cognitive dissonance, there is NO SUCH THING as “sustainable agriculture” and never will be – PERIOD.   I donâ’t ‘careâ’ (believe) what the corporate hydroponic spin-meisterâ’s and Rodale and Mother Jones garden-club magazine adherents assert.  Energy and material flows just do not ‘work’ in closed loops – it’s a physical impossibility regardless of how much we may wish it to be otherwise.  To {chose to) think that we can somehow trick, force or otherwise cajole this universe into operating to our whim, on our timetable, for our behalf is willfully delusional (sorry ’bout that).  We’ve had this (one-way) ‘discussion’ before.   We animals exist on energy flows (through put) in the form of organic molecules (Carbon-bonds), which are continuously degraded by our very existence.  This includes every/all forms of minerals (e.g. metals, ‘trace’ elements).  Good luck with getting photosynthesis to manufacture more hydrogenated Boron or ‘free’ Magnesium, as just two examples.  ‘Creative chemistry’ management and wishful thinking will never change that.  FWIW.  All that being said, undoubtedly you’ll be eating much longer into the future than the vast majority of humans on this degraded planet – including your ‘neighbors’.  And, If you have ‘it’ and they don’t, well, guess what?  Just as no man (or family) is an island, no greenhouse or agronomic ‘system’ is ‘sustainable’ over decades NTM generations even in the absence of zombie-hordes.

  • January 26, 2008 at 10:01 am
    Permalink

    Great and everything that I know to be true, except maybe the timeline.I do not think it will take 5-10 years, but maybe 2 at the most. 6 months ago nobody believed (that I knew)in this, but today, more and more are starting to believe. My only hope it that the silent majority stays silent long enough for me to finish my preparations. Dont get me wrong, I care as much as the next guy, but after not being listened to for a couple of years now, the last thing I need is a panicked population creating havoc too early. Desperation is a mammy jammer and when 300 million americans get desperate, shit is going to fly.

  • January 26, 2008 at 11:18 am
    Permalink

    Mmm….there is possibility of sustainable agriculture….it’s not hydroponics, though, that’s for sure….and….it might be juuust slightly unsustainable over the very long run in certain climates, but we can get pretty darn close. We can do much, much better than we are doing now. Instead of depleting the soil in 50 years, or less, we can stretch that to something like 500-1000 years.

    It’s labor-intensive and it’s land-intensive and it has a lot of limitations…and it’s too much to go into here. Sustainable agriculture on a large scale? I don’t see how that could be done without massive restructuring of agriculture now, and I don’t see it happening in my lifetime, and I don’t believe it could feed the population we have now.
    Sustainable agriculture possible…I say yes, I think so…but…I don’t see many people at all practicing the needed methods right now.

    And, ummm….I just don’t believe in ANY one-word solution. There is no way any ONE thing is going to ‘save us’….I don’t think people are going to do what is required to save the situation even IF there were just ‘one thing’ we could do.

    I think you just look at your personal and regional situation and assets and figure out what you need to do so you and yours might make it through.

    WHEN people finally stop putting their faith in guvmint, and authority, and start ousting the robber-barons, and start taking local control over their own damn lives and providing more for themselves locally, and facing the fact that this luxurious consumer-driven life cannot continue, we might see some improvement in our survival prospects…but would that happen soon enough?

    Nahhhhhh.

  • January 27, 2008 at 8:29 am
    Permalink

    I have not yet begun to ‘quote’

    and ‘single quotes’ count as half

    From Wiki en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark

    Usage
    1.1 Quotations and speech
    1.2 Irony (!)
    1.3 Signaling unusual usage (!)
    People use quotation marks in this way to:
    – indicate descriptive but unusual, colloquial, folksy words or phrases
    – indicate descriptive but startling, humorous, or metaphoric words or phrases
    distance the writer from the terminology in question so as not – to be associated with it. For example, to indicate that a quoted word is not official terminology, or that a quoted phrase pre-supposes things that the author does not necessarily agree with.
    – indicate special terminology that should be identified for accuracy’s sake as someone else’s terminology,

    1.4 Use–mention distinction (!)
    1.5 Titles of artistic works
    1.6 Nicknames and false titles
    1.7 Emphasis (incorrect usage) (!)

    now you ‘know’

  • January 27, 2008 at 9:34 am
    Permalink

    The most significant thing I’ve seen in the last few weeks is this article:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/nato/story/0,,2244782,00.html

    In it we have NATO declaring a right to preemptively strike other nations with nuclear weapons. One of the reasons given is:

    Climate change and energy security, entailing a contest for resources and potential “environmental” migration on a mass scale.

    They know. They damn well full know and they are NOT sleep walking into the future. Those of you who think this is happening because of stupidity, because of incompetence, or anything other than deliberate willful planning are being naive, hoping that if you educate them they will “wake up” and change course. THEY ARE AWAKE ALREADY! They’ve chosen the course they intend to follow. And you get no say in the matter.

    Hang on to your hat. This ride is liable to be wilder than anything any of us imagine.

  • January 27, 2008 at 10:27 am
    Permalink

    Hey, anybody been to google earth lately. I couldn’t find the Arctic on it, just ocean.Greenland and the Antarctic was there, but no Artic ice cap. So, where the hell are the polar bears?

Leave a Reply