Does this news make you happy, sad, scared, or reassured?

Question

News alert from Nature:

http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080402/pdf/452508a.pdf

Main article:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v452/n7187/pdf/452531a.pdf

The gist: The IPCC has underestimated the difficulty of stabilizing carbon emissions. In other words, greater technological advances than estimated will be required to reduce carbon emissions. In other words, from a skeptic's perspective, there might be far greater costs to mitigate something that isn't a problem to begin with. From an alarmist's viewpoint, it might be that an already hopeless situation became just that much bleaker.

Answer 1

I guess this is where my "denial" steps in. I will never listen to arguments saying it's too hard or that it can't be done.

Nobody knows what the future will bring but it just shows us that we have to keep on trying even harder.

Answer 2

I believe my exact response would be....duh.

Environmentalists are notorious for assuming science can whip up anything imaginable at the drop of a hat.  Many believe we already have the technology needed, we're just sitting on it to benefit big oil while denying the inventors billions (like that would happen)!  No one with a realistic view of the situation ever believed we'd magically jump forward into the future like Michael J Fox.  The only way to reduce man's CO2 emissions is to go backward, which is the end result of over-taxation.  If they have it their way, we'll be back to horses as our main source of transportation by 2100AD.  Then corn WILL make sense as a fuel source!

Answer 3

makes me not care with the lies they have in that article.

Answer 4

The news?! I don't watch that c**p.

Answer 5

None of the above.

I think it's clearly bizarrely pessimistic about our ability to develop better technology to make and conserve energy.  It's from the school of "I told Orville and Wilbur, and I'm telling you: it will never fly."  Clarke's Law applies.  "When an old and distinguished scientist says something is possible believe him.  When he says something is impossible, ignore him."

It's also completely unrealistic.  Note that they totally ignore the incentives produced by the rising price of oil.  Typical "skeptical" thinking, ignoring even basic facts.

It does mean we need to get crackin'.

Answer 6

Pielke Jr.?  That's a surprising author of this sort of paper.

It appears that there's a lot of dispute as to whether the IPCC's technological advancement assumptions are valid.  Several of those interviewed made the good point that China's energy consumption has been skyrocketing, and apparently this was not anticipated by the IPCC.

Overall I'd say this news makes me rather concerned that once again the IPCC "alarmists" were too conservative in their projections.

Answer 7

I never doubted this.  Their estimates are probably still too conservative.

Answer 8

don't care I'm not going to worry about something that is not caused by me or that i can't stop anyway. mature is a way more powerful force than i am or will ever be.

Answer 9

Yawn, yes if you say so. I really can't get excited about it.

Man as a species will do nothing but harm to the planet, nothing will change that and in the scheme of things I'll be dead soon.