Suicidal Trolling


They don’t care, anymore. Is that a sign of insanity, or confidence?

“Hey, Florida voters! We’re going to open your waters to oil exploration if we win in November! PS – Vote republican!”

Maybe the republicans are just that sure they can steal the election, and the party’s underlying sadism is on display. “Why would we do this to you? Because we can.”

Politico: [politico]

The Trump administration is preparing to open the door to oil and gas drilling off Florida’s coast – but will wait until after the November election to avoid blowback in a swing state whose waters both parties have long considered sacrosanct, according to four people familiar with the plan.

Perhaps the people of Florida deserve a big, sticky, oil spill on their beaches as a way of thanking them for voting republican. Welcome to the post-truth reality of 2020 – out here in Pennsylvania, we’re getting fliers in our mailboxes claiming that Joe Biden is going to kill 600,000 Pennsylvania fracking jobs if he gets into office. There are nowhere near 600,000 fracking jobs and what’s killing fracking jobs is the shocking price drop of Saudi, Iraqi, and Iranian oil. Also, Biden’s hardly going to rock the corporate boat that much. Unfortunately.

Drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico would fulfill a long-sought goal of energy companies, giving them access to potentially billions of barrels of oil that have been off-limits since the federal government withdrew leases it had sold in 1985. But even the possibility of drilling is a politically explosive topic for Floridians, who worry that oil spills would devastate their tourism-based economy in a reprise of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster.

Let me remind anyone who’s been asleep at their keyboard: humanity is on track for extinction caused by waste CO2 emitted by burning fossil fuels. “Accessing” potentially billions of barrels off Florida just means that oil prices will stay low, allowing fossil fuels to compete with renewable energy.

The IPCC chart shows several projected possibilities for CO2 output based on moderate increases, continuation of the existing rate of increases, a significant slowdown of increases, and a severe slowdown of increases. The A2 scenario is the one we are tracking and appear to be dead set on continuing to track; that’s the one with the catastrophic tipping-point increases that result in run-away heating. That’s the one that the republicans and (to be honest) the core of the democrat party “centrists” like Nancy Pelosi appear to want. Could it have anything to do with the fact that Nancy Pelosi will die rich in comfort well before the impact progresses past the difficulty finding bluefin tuna sushi, the California wildfires, and the increase in agricultural product prices? How much of this is due to the fact that rich people are better positioned to weather these problems? If the cost of bluefin quintuples, Nancy Pelosi can still afford it.

As a reminder, a 2-4C increase in temperatures is going to result in economic distress and food shortages in many places. Including California and the US midwest. We’re already in the early stages of the slow-moving disaster. At the high end of 2-4C, 4C, parts of the planet become uninhabitable. That’s already the case with places in Saudi Arabia and Arizona: if the power fails, the AC stops – and if the AC doesn’t come back on in 6 hours people die. If the AC doesn’t come on for a week, people will get in their cars and run the car AC while they try to escape.

The red line, which we are tracking, is the one that maps to a 6C-10C increase, which is “game over, man” in the immortal words of Pvt Hudson. There won’t be a sudden drop even if humanity gets its collective shit together, these effects will certainly last thousands of years, maybe tens of thousands. Congratulations, humans, you’ve terraformed the Earth. Too bad it was already pretty nice, because it’s not going to be really soon, in geologic time-scales.

In case going after Florida’s oil isn’t enough, the Trump administration is also preparing to contest the newly exploitable sites at the poles. Because, mere dick-waving isn’t enough when there’s oil in the ground.

The Guardian: [guard]

Donald Trump has ordered the construction of a fleet of icebreakers and bases to pursue US interests in the Arctic and Antarctic by the end of the decade in a signal that his administration is going to take a more aggressive approach to the contest with Russia and China for polar resources.

“US interests” means only one thing, because the polar regions don’t grow opium (yet): oil.

Trump issued a memorandum on “safeguarding US national interests in the Arctic and Antarctic regions” which calls on the administration to come up with a plan within 60 days that would include at least three heavy icebreakers to be built by 2029, and recommendations for locations to build two support bases in the US and two on foreign soil. 

The memorandum appeared designed to expand and inject extra urgency into a longstanding US Coast Guard plan to build three heavy and three medium icebreakers. It suggests the US look into leasing arrangements while the new fleet is being built.

There is no interest in science, no interest in anything except gaining influence over exploitable natural resources. It’s not as though the US needs icebreakers in order to get riot police up to the arctic regions. It’s not as though the US wants those icebreakers to help deal with emerging viruses like Covid-19. The US only gives a damn about one thing, and it amounts to “how can we possibly make our problems worse?”

Meanwhile, another prediction by the boffins is coming true: [guardian]

Seventy-two nomadic herders, including 41 children, were hospitalised in far north Russia after the region began experiencing abnormally high temperatures.

Oh, yeah, there are nasty ancient pathogens in that ice? Great. Fortunately it’s just a few things that are very tough, like anthrax, that can survive being buried in permafrost – we don’t have to worry about a smallpox pandemic coming roaring out of the deep freeze.

The US’ incompetent response to Covid-19 appears to mirror its strategy for global climate change: “we’ll tough it out.” Here’s an analogy:

Suppose you get in a car with a friend and they immediately jam on the throttle and start rocketing down the highway, speeding up the whole time. You scream “what are you doing?! Slow Down!” and they tell you “I’ll slow down but only after I hit that big concrete barricade up ahead of us.” Then, “We’ll be fine.”

Comments

  1. komarov says

    I think what I like best is how all the real data we already have appears to have reduced the uncertainty of the doomsday business-as-usual scenario to a noticeable extent, compared to all those models chocked full of wishful thinking and expensive reform. Way to go, oh exhalted leaders. Once we have reaaally solid data maybe we can discuss possible concerns people might have about this. But let’s make sure first.

    Oh, and you noticed the anthrax outbreak is from 2016? From the text it reads a bit like “now”. Now was four years ago. Still, this is no time to take rash action and risk a dip in the stock market, is it?

    “You scream “what are you doing?! Slow Down!” and they tell you “I’ll slow down but only after I hit that big concrete barricade up ahead of us.” Then, “We’ll be fine.””

    You forgot the part about how some people just have to die for the sake of the automobile industry and didn’t even mention the Mark XXIII Full Body Airbag on your friend’s side.

  2. says

    komarov@#1:
    Oh, and you noticed the anthrax outbreak is from 2016?

    Yes; that’s how my mind jumps around. I’d seen that news before, it just seems to be re-relevant given the Covid-19 outbreak. Boffins have been talking about pathogens moving between populations since the beginning of the climate change crisis, and the anthrax is an obvious example of that, but the Covid-19 may be a subtle example.

  3. komarov says

    Re: (#2):

    Absolutely relevant. I remembered reading about it at the time as well. Reading the quote I first thought it’s either another anthrax outbreak or, if things are *really* going haywire, a case of mass hyperthermia in a group of people used to very different conditions. Very far-fetched but that doesn’t stop my brain.

    I’m not sure how you draw the line between climate change and COVID-19 though. You mentioned subtlety. But from my reading about it COVID-19 seems to boil down to a probability game not affected by climate change. I.e. enough people, enough interactions (people-animals / people-people) and enough attempts (diseases jumping to humans) simply must result in a pandemic eventually. It happens to be now, but could just as easily have been in 2040, when we’ll all die of a) Deadly Evolved Airborne Legionella or b) Turning off the AC (to take up your prediction) to avoid the DEAL-40 living in every air conditioner. That would be much less subtle, at least.

  4. John Morales says

    Commercial forces are a factor that should not be discounted.
    Related: Australian farmers’ insurance coverage to be pulled if CSG infrastructure is on properties.

    Australia’s largest insurance company says it will no longer cover farmers for public liability if they have coal seam gas (CSG) infrastructure on their property.
    […]
    IAG said for customers who “have operational CSG or shale gas activities or infrastructure on their property, such as a coal seam gas well, we will be unable to provide liability cover as part of their insurance policy”.

    IAG said the company does not specialise in mining and resources operations and the change will affect existing customers when their policies come up for renewal.
    […]
    Queensland farmers said they were fearful the change could expose them to liability risks and could extend to other risks associated with CSG, such as the potential for groundwater contamination.

  5. says

    komarov@#3:
    I’m not sure how you draw the line between climate change and COVID-19 though.

    I’m jumping ahead: as food shortages, migration, and reduction of habitable zones starts to get more severe, humans will be in closer contact with (and eating) animals that may be reservoirs of new viruses. Also, as we drive some species to extinction, others will jockey for the remaining biological niches – things get unpredictable is all I’m saying.

  6. jrkrideau says

    Joe Biden is going to kill 600,000 Pennsylvania fracking jobs
    Don’t believe them. those jobs aroe all gone already. Fracking has always been a ponzi scheme and the Saudi oil tiff with Russia has killed it off.

    Re the icebreakers, luckily I did not have a hot drink in my hand when I first saw the release.

    This has the potential to turn into a fiasco that might rival the F-35 boondoggle. Well worse in some ways since the US has some experience in building war planes. It looks like the last time the US built an icebreaker was roughly 45 years ago.

    Here is the competition, the / Artika. I am not sure but I think the Russia has 6 or 7 nuclear icebreakers and a couple more being built. Heck China has two modern icebreakers, one nuclear and one conventional, I think.

  7. John Morales says

    jrkrideau:

    I am not sure but I think the Russia has 6 or 7 nuclear icebreakers and a couple more being built.

    Well, yes — the competition. We know why they have and are being built: oil and gas fields in the Arctic.

    But no worries, give it a couple of decades and one won’t be needing icebreakers. :|

  8. jrkrideau says

    @ 7 John Morales
    We know why they have and are being built: oil and gas fields in the Arctic.

    Ah, not really though that probably is an important reason now. Russia and before that the USSR, has had an interest in the Northern Route for a long time. The Lenin was commissioned back in 1959. Yamal was commissioned in 1992.

    The Northern Route has been important to Russia long before the oil rush. If you look at transit times from Europe to Asia you suddenly see one reason.

    But no worries, give it a couple of decades and one won’t be needing icebreakers

    Well, in the summer, anyway.

  9. ColeYote says

    The US’ incompetent response to Covid-19 appears to mirror its strategy for global climate change: “we’ll tough it out.”

    Even that’s giving them too much credit, it implies they accept that there’s a problem.

Leave a Reply