The solution is neither. How about tote bags, baskets, glass jars?
I can’t count how many times have we ordered something from Amazon and we get a box is a box?
But as long as we have idiots running the USA, claiming that global heating is a “hoax”, we cannot have any influence on China’s approach to this issue.In view of this statement, can anyone tell me why the Obamas bought a $14,850,000 beach front house? Makes no sense at all to me in view of climate change, global warming, ocean levels rising, more severe storms, acting consistent with your beliefs, and wanting to be an example to others.
As to why the Obamas bought it, it was reportedly a bargain and they are doing what rich people do. They buy nice houses in nice places.
Second, a little googling informed me that the mansion is at about 65 ft elevation. IPCC predictions are that sea levels will rise about 1/2 to 1 1/2 meters this century. Their predictions have tracked closely with actual sea level rise for a few decades now.
That means that by the end of the century the Obama house will still be over 60 feet above sea level. There is still plenty of time for many generations of Obama’s to enjoy a wonderful home.
Or, they might enjoy a big profit if they flip it.
Now, if they had bought a mansion in Miami, they would have more to worry about.
3 - 10 feet above sea level. He doesn’t believe his own bullshit.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2019/08/obama-ocean-mansion-3-10-feet-above-sea-level-daniel-greenfield/
GerrySM-
I’m not “setting up” an us-vs-them. I’m just describing reality. Reality is, anything we do will be utterly overshadowed by the actions of the other major superpower, over whom we have little to no control, and who generates twice as much carbon as the rest of the western world combined.
We can’t even get them to agree to a reasonably equitable trading relationship, and Trump is using most every tool in the toolbox to do so. Imagine getting them to curtail carbon - well, verifiable nuclear deals require on-site inspections, and this would too. Do we imagine they’ll go along with this?
Heck, just getting the trade thing done is taking years, and is like pulling teeth.
In engineering scheduling, the practice is to find “what is the long pole in the tent”, and then work on that first, the reason being that if you can’t nail that one down, none of the rest of the things matter all that much.
Same thing here. If we can’t get the other superpower to go along, pretty much none of what we do matters. If we truly only have 12 years, and we spend the trillions to check off every box in AOC’s list, it won’t matter because “someone else” won’t be checking off any boxes at all. And they are twice our size.
Is anyone even talking about a regime like you describe? International economic boycotts of the other superpower to achieve carbon objectives? Again - long pole in the tent. If we don’t have such a thing as part of the plan - the plan simply won’t work.
That’s bs. If it were no higher than that it would be regularly flooded now in storms and unusually high tides.
Check out the pics with this article and tell me its 3-10 ft above seal level.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/names/2019/08/22/barack-and-michelle-obama-are-reportedly-buying-martha-vineyard-mansion/cuoVonwx5Uxen9GAQMo1bP/story.html
In fact, looking at a flood zone map, it doesn’t appear that the house is even in a 500 year flood zone. Though I admit, the map isn’t all that clear.
https://www.mvtimes.com/2014/11/12/homeowners-advised-invest-elevation-certificates/
Reading a number of comments on this site, they said his home is right at the 10 feet contour mark.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/28/sea-level-rise-dooms-obamas-new-martha-vineyard-mansion/
Here’s the real estate listing:
https://www.landvest.com/property/118347933/79-turkeyland-cove-road-edgartown-ma-02539/#
Maybe the property has already been experiencing more flooding and that’s why the seller is selling? Looking at the photo, I would agree that is doesn’t look much higher than 10 feet off the water. It certainly isn’t anywhere close to 65 feet, neither by appearance nor by the topographical information. His house is right on the Edgartown Great Pond between Turkeyland Cove and Slough Cove. Here’s the topo map:
https://www.topozone.com/massachusetts/dukes-ma/island/marthas-vineyard/
Do you see anything much higher than 10 feet around the edge of the pond? Me neither. The topo map doesn’t lie. Let’s consider the possibilities. With a high tide and hurricane storm surge, that barrier island will be very easily overrun and I’m afraid the Edgartown Great Pond may become the Edgartown Lake, complete with climate change driven waves of considerable height. As an example, apparently due to climate change, we had a record October 2018 storm on Lake Superior with a 28.8 foot maximum wave height. Given that the North Atlantic is bigger and badder than Lake Superior, I’d say the combination of high tide, hurricane storm surge, and wave height has the potential to put Barack and his beloved’s real estate in quite a precarious position.
As far as flipping that property, can you imagine the lawsuit that would result if the subsequent buyer experiences significant property damage, loss of property value, and/or loss of property size secondary to flooding, especially when it is doubtful that the seller could claim ignorance of climate change?
As I said, I can’t figure this one out.
You can find it on Google Earth at 41.360723°N 70.546310°W. Move the cursor around and you’ll see the front of the house is at 9’ and the rear is at 11’ above sea level.
QB-
Doug - That’s bs. If it were no higher than that it would be regularly flooded now in storms and unusually high tides. Check out the pics with this article and tell me its 3-10 ft above seal level.I concur, google earth says "3m" (in the lower right corner of the map) at or around the house location. I give him 12 years before he's underwater. Better get to work on that sea level mitigation project. I have to say, it is a nice house though. Compare and contrast with Jimmy Carter. I wonder what Obama did that Carter didn't do?
Isn’t it interesting how politicians, who’ve spent their whole career in public service (with that word service open to much interpretation) wind up becoming wealthy with book deals. Big, BIG book deals … in a country where the majority hardly read more than a page or two at a time anymore … and where they especially don’t spend the time required to wade through a long, boring book (like Kamala Harris’s book that I’m laboriously wading through … yawn … a soporific, self congratulatory tome that I’d heartily recommend to anyone suffering from insomnia). Could the possibility exist that it’s not the public buying all these books but just a few (and perhaps a very, very few) select buyers? And could these buyers purchase large numbers of these books for the purpose of charitably distributing them for free (or maybe just chucking them in a dumpster someplace)? And could this be a way of legally (but not ethically) transferring funds to the book author for political favors, connections, information, etc., rendered past, present, and future. You know, like those lucrative speaking gigs where you get 6 figures for telling the obvious to your other CFR buddies. Naaahhh. That’s way too far out to even consider. Gotta stop reading all this Federal Reserve, JFK assassination, and 9/11 stuff and head to bed. Kamala babe, where are you?
Sure it might be under water in 100 years, but by then Barack and Michelle would have been dead for 80 years, more or less. They have other assets to leave to their kids.
Re: China — we cannot keep saying “let’s do nothing because someone else is doing nothing”. That’s unproductive, childish and self-defeating. Once we are all doing something, China will join us, or they will be shunned.
This good article still makes it hard to visualise the scale of the operation required to switch to renewables. Wikipedia has an article “the Cubic Mile of Oil equivalent”. One year’s consumption is about 1 CuM., just in petroleum. The total with coal, gas and renewables ic about 3CuM.
One omission in the article is it’s not considering growth in the regular economy. Take the IMF statistic of 3.5% annual growth and our total consumption would double in 20 years. That now comes in at 5-6 CuM . Basically double every example given in this article. Let’s say we can convert to hydro, the most efficient alternate energy source. Just to keep pace with current growth -which we are addicted to- would require 153 dams each the size of China’s 3 gorges dam. In 20 years. That is close to building 7 such dams every year. It really is a no can do .
So basically we as a locust species are going to crash. It is hard wired into our make up. We humans cannot understand the “exponential function” as Prof Bartlett said years ago.
Everyone says Malthus was wrong. No he was right, just premature. We made a few adjustments but they all aimed at using more resources in a shorter period of time. and now time itself is the killer tool.
Has no one here ever been to a seashore? Nothing is built within 3-10 feet of sea level unless its on stilts. Edgartown itself has an elevation of 16.4 ft. and it is far downhill from Obama’s potential mansion.
https://www.google.com/search?sxsrf=ACYBGNSkhhsW5Azx4gKj4tMfGf1NkyNVCQ%3A1570430405828&ei=xd2aXa6cMs6v_QbP0o9w&q=edgartown+ma+elevation&oq=Edgartown+MA+elevation&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0i70i251.41065.44434..72469...0.2..0.110.904.4j5......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71j0i20i263j0j0i22i30.9euCrVPJ5Qs
The confusion probably entered the singularly feeble minds of Anthony Watts, et al, because the beach front of the estate probably does run down to close to sea level. It’s a beach. The Edgartown Great pond, upon which the property’s beach fronts, is separated from the ocean by a thin barrier beach that probably over tops in storms and high tides. The so-called pond is actually an estuary that, by definition, must be close to sea level.
In a tony neighborhood like Edgartown and, more generally, Martha’s Vineyard, I’m sure codes would prohibit building within flood zones, which 3-10 feet above sea level would certainly be. Hell, I live near a small river that has a flood zone greater than 10 ft above OHW.
Besides, it defies common sense that 1) a real estate developer would have invested so much in a very expensive mansion if he knew the place was a flooding hazard, 2)the local codes would permit a house being built that close to sea level in 2001 (when it was built), 2) the undoubtedly intelligent Obamas and their retinue of lawyers and advisors would be stupid enough to buy a place that floods regularly, 3) local real estate pros would try to unload a place that floods regularly for double digit millions of dollars.
I saw the 65’ figure that I originally quoted somewhere in my early googling, but am unable to find it again. So, my bad. Nonetheless, nothing suggests that the mansion is within 3-10 ft of the ocean. (Except, that is, for the far right wing nuts who profit from hating the Obamas)
GerrySM-
Re: China — we cannot keep saying “let’s do nothing because someone else is doing nothing”. That’s unproductive, childish and self-defeating. Once we are all doing something, China will join us, or they will be shunned.Hey I'm all for doing something. That Peak Oil mitigation thing that Hirsch came up with - I'm fine with doing that. That actually makes sense to me because, China or no China, we benefit regardless. Let's just pretend the Hirsch conversion is about climate change. And if China actually starts to show they care, maybe we can do more. Sound good?
Doug- I saw the 65′ figure that I originally quoted somewhere in my early googling, but am unable to find it again. So, my bad. Nonetheless, nothing suggests that the mansion is within 3-10 ft of the ocean. (Except, that is, for the far right wing nuts who profit from hating the Obamas)So Doug. I voted for Obama. And I also know how to use "google earth". Google earth says the Obama Mansion is at 3m elevation. Not "far right wing nuts". Google earth. Is that a product of "far right wing nuts?" As for being an Obama Hater - I didn't see Jimmy Carter living like this after his time in office. I do see Obama doing so. Does that make me a far right wing nut? I'm not sure there are many far right wing nuts who voted for Obama. I think I even contributed to his campaign once, long ago. Obama's "book deal" was what, $65 million? Nice work, if you can get it. Carter should have "written a book". He is the single best ex President we've had, IMO. Does thinking that make me a "far right wing nut"? Try google earth. Then come back and tell us what you found.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_for_Humanity
I’m going to say that Carter has, in a very real sense, plunked down over $30 million for his mansion. Only difference is, he has a lot of tenants. And he did it when the rewards for being an (xhmmm) ex president were a lot less, and the cost / value of $30 million was a lot more.
For what it’s worth, if I had been old enough to vote I wouldn’t have voted for Jimmy Carter… but I find him to be better than any president since him. Retrospectively, I also find him to be better than most before him. I admire him. I wish the CIA hadn’t overthrown him with the October surprise to seize the presidency for the next forty years, but it seems pretty clear they did.
Over the years here Doug has consistently demonstrated his refusal to let facts and data put a dent in any of his fiercely and emotionally held beliefs and assumptions. He’s best ignored. I’ve never seen him alter one of his beliefs (“no one who is intelligent, especially our lord and savior Barack Hussein Obama, would buy or build a house where it was only 3 meters above sea level, SO the house they bought MUST absolutely be higher than that and I don’t care what anyone says.”).
Yo Adam! Will we ever get the “Ignore” button back?
Take the IMF statistic of 3.5% annual growth and our total consumption would double in 20 years. That now comes in at 5-6 CuMThat’s of course a great point, and I left that one and many others out of this very short article. Even with that, it’s already longer than most people are willing to read. Which illustrates in a small way just how complex and complicated this all is. To have been somewhat more complete I would have had to include at least one or more paragraphs on the following:
- Future growth in consumption (which you noted by growing the 3 CuMi to 6 CuMi)
- The fact that total current battery production, if dedicated to storing grid scale energy from solar/wind, can store about 10 minutes worth
- That Alt-energy is not “renewables” but “replaceables” requiring a complete rebuild and replacement cycle every ~25 years
- There is no all electric option for the following:
- Cargo ships
- Large jets
- Long haul cargo trains
- Making ammonia from atmospheric nitrogen
- Large tractors
- Tens of thousands of industrial chemical precursors
Similarly, any pretense of democracy will be chucked right the eff out the window the second anybody actually tries to align their personal actions with the real situation on the ground.
The Extinction Rebellion folks already discovered that in the UK there’s no such thing as democracy or rule of law.
Without a warrant the police just bashed in the door of their rented flat, arrested everyone on the pre-crime charge of planning to do something in the future (“suspicion of conspiracy to cause public nuisance”), and took all of their equipment.
The powers that be are going to use every trick in the book and, now we know, many tricks that aren’t even in the books. Yet.
You can be sure that “pre-crime” is racing right to the top of the list, which we know is something that one of Jeffrey Epstein’s scummy companies was working on along with some awful Likudnik connections.
I tell you, it’s almost as if there’s a great battle shaping up – one that can be condensed into “good vs. evil.” You may be forced to choose sides. Choose carefully but always in alignment with your inner compass.
In the meantime, here's a recent pic from downtown LA. We can ignore this all we want, but the process of collapse is well underway.
As energy winds down, this really is the future.
The extinction rebellion is right - we either take all of this quite seriously right here and now, or we might as well just throw the largest farewell party in all of history because what comes next will be a fantastically narrow bottleneck.
The math says so.
Any idea how the flood buyout program is going in Virginia Beach?Looks like they have gotten out in front of the problem…
This essay states a focus on the problem of “the world transitioning gently to an alternative.” This is misleading doom porn. I think that you need to be more honest/accurate by stating your focus is on the inability of “the American way of life transitioning gently…” The majority of the “world” is now already at a perhaps 10x lower energy level than that of the narcissistic, over-fed Americans and actually, are increasing their quality of life due to renewables. Their future looks brighter due to renewable energies and they are going for it. This is the real world.Mots - I’m really intrigued and inspired by your experience in wiring up DC stuff directly. Tinkering and working it all out. I wish you lived next door and I could wander over and watch and maybe learn. My point in writing this article is to point out that the massively complex – and growing – economy is not going to transition over to renewables. Not easily and not without a lot of probable losses. I 100% agree that western countries, with the US near the head of that pack, can and should (and eventually will) live on a lot less energy per capita. I take exception at the idea that Nepal offers us anything useful in the way that they are using renewables because, as far as I know, Nepal does not produce any of solar or wind gear being installed. That takes heavy industry, and that takes a complex economy, and that takes a massive amount of energy flowing through to build up and then sustain. It’s kind of irrelevant to my argument, no offense, if or how a developing country imports super-high-tech gadgets and then uses them to measurably improve their energy poor lives. The necessary question is “how much energy is required to sustain the manufacturing supply chains elsewhere required to build (and then transport) these gadgets in the first place?” My main point was that if we collectively wait until after the obvious peak in fossil fuels to address that question, we’ll find that it’s impossible to address on the downslope of net energy per capita. Once on the downslope, my theory goes, we’re going to be busy fighting wars, scrabbling for “our fair share” and scrambling to preserve what we've already built vs. having the capacity to build brand new, grand, alt-energy systems. The challenge, then, of course will be to not only replace energy gone missing from fossil fuels, but to also build out energy systems to add to the mix. Without that growth imperative, our entire financial system locks up and collapses. That’s what’s being fought tooth and nail right now. And I get it. Without our financial/money system operating smoothly, everything breaks down. Nothing is possible. People are hard enough to organize into teams of eight. Try organizing 7.8 billion when the main agreement among and between them all (money) gets shredded. It’s a before and after scenario. At any rate, my thesis is that outsiders can come and install all the solar panels in Nepal that they want – literally enough to bring light to every house and every corner – and that Nepal will not somehow, magically, develop the ability to create their own replacement panels, batteries, and wiring. That capability requires a massive subsidy of surplus energy from elsewhere, which in this story is fossil fuels.