Comments on: Climate Progress at M.I.T.: Whither the Manned Space Program? http://climateprogress.org/2006/09/28/climate-progress-at-mit-whither-the-manned-space-program/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Sun, 21 Mar 2010 05:20:00 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Brain Lint » Blog Archive » TRETC Panel: Innovation and The Energy Crisis http://climateprogress.org/2006/09/28/climate-progress-at-mit-whither-the-manned-space-program/#comment-68 Brain Lint » Blog Archive » TRETC Panel: Innovation and The Energy Crisis Fri, 06 Oct 2006 04:36:22 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2006/09/28/climate-progress-at-mit-whither-the-manned-space-program/#comment-68 [...] The most captivating and depressing session from TRETC was easily “Innovation and the Energy Crisis”. The panelists (well three of them: Nathan Lewis, Joseph Romm and Robert C. Armstrong) painted the most dire picture of global climate change that I have heard yet. They argued that within twenty years there will be massive redirection of capital into mitigating the effects of climate change, which will have such priority that relative luxuries like the space program will go by the wayside (clarification on this here). [...] [...] The most captivating and depressing session from TRETC was easily “Innovation and the Energy Crisis”. The panelists (well three of them: Nathan Lewis, Joseph Romm and Robert C. Armstrong) painted the most dire picture of global climate change that I have heard yet. They argued that within twenty years there will be massive redirection of capital into mitigating the effects of climate change, which will have such priority that relative luxuries like the space program will go by the wayside (clarification on this here). [...]

]]> By: Albert http://climateprogress.org/2006/09/28/climate-progress-at-mit-whither-the-manned-space-program/#comment-59 Albert Mon, 02 Oct 2006 20:49:05 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2006/09/28/climate-progress-at-mit-whither-the-manned-space-program/#comment-59 And an 80 foot rise in sea levels could still be a low projection. As they say in the IPCC "The rapid forcing of a non-linear system has a high prospect of producing surprises," (p. 78). See <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/09/060928-hot-earth.html" rel="nofollow">Hot "Prehistoric" Conditions May Return by 2100, Study Says</a>, where they talk about a 300 foot sea level rise, or see Lovelock's new book. And an 80 foot rise in sea levels could still be a low projection. As they say in the IPCC “The rapid forcing of a non-linear system has a high prospect of producing surprises,” (p. 78).

See Hot “Prehistoric” Conditions May Return by 2100, Study Says, where they talk about a 300 foot sea level rise, or see Lovelock’s new book.

]]>