Will anyone benefit from Climate Change?

Post Reply New Topic

Nowadays one is bombarded by new stories about how some species is at risk or some country or region's economy is in dire jeopardy due to climate change.

Although I'm certain most of these stories are true, I still can't help thinking there must be somebody or something that stands to benefit. Is it not reasonable to expect that some currently semi-arid region will become damp enough to support agriculture, or that another place will enjoy a longer and more productive growing season?

Certainly some species will take advantage of the change. The Ice Ages and even asteroid impacts have harmed many species but also allowed others to flourish. It should also be noted that many of these changes occurred quite suddenly.

As long as we're told it's inevitable it must be reasonable to try for a bright side.

Yes, there would be plenty that would benefit. A lot of land would become arable that is currently under permafrost, a country like Russia which 2/3rds is under permafrost could once again become a superpower because of it.

Last edited by Jacoby on 23 Nov 2014, 7:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

I don't think global cooling will be generally beneficial. Warmer weather, on the other hand, could make it possible to exploit oil reserves in the Arctic. There could be mineral reserves hiding under the Greenland ice sheet, and glaciers could also be blocking access to currently hidden riches.

All the snake oil salesmen pushing for the sale of carbon credits.

GW is just a scam to promote a global political and economic movement. Nothing more.

Will anyone benefit from Climate Change? You mean besides Al Gore?

Look at how the politicians live who tout climate change policies. You think they really care about the environment? Or is it more about lining their pocketbooks and tightening their hold on power?

What about all the money going to solar energy, biofuel, and the like?

Don't get me wrong…I do think if there is a risk that human beings pose a danger to the environment that something needs to be done. I just want to know that something is being done because there is a problem, not because someone stands to gain substantially through fraud.

Even with the melting of permafrost those lands will not magically become fertile soil from day one. Soil is something complex formed through the cycle of living things, it make take centuries or even thousand of years before it form. In the middle run one of the main problem will be the rise of the oceans, which will result in the displacement of millions of peoples, maybe eventually even billions; it could brought a lot of armed conflits.

As for the question as if there is peoples who would benefit from climate change, of course there is some that will benefit, this is a global phenomenom on a eventual population of ten billions with various interests. War, for example, is a terrible thing that bring a lot of suffering; yet there is still people that benefit from it.

Firstly global warming is no scam I've seen the data and did the simple math myself (anyone can do it.. practically every country on earth has independently kept temperature records for the last century). Sure some people are benefiting from it but humans can find an angle to benefit from anything.

As for the change in climate benefiting people.. as another has stated even if a climate that was previously frozen thaws the land will still be barren.. without the necessary micro and macro-organisms such as bacteria, worms and insects in the soil anything you try to plant will die.

At the same time formerly viable soil is getting too hot and the organisms that keep it fertile are dying and the seas are rising leaving us with overall a huge loss for every tiny gain in land usage.

That's not even taking into account the uptick in severe weather which can destroy crops quite easily.

It annoys me to no end how people get so caught up with either arguing about whether or not a scientifically established fact is real or whether or not its natural or caused by humans and completely fail to make an attempt at the only question that really matters: What are we going to do about it?

About what?

Global warming.

I believe warming is generally beneficial, but satellite data shows that the globe has been cooling since 1998. Besides, I don't think it is possible to manipulate the climate in any noticeable way, but you are free to try if you like. I won't stop you.

You say its generally beneficial but how?

As for the "cooling since 1998" myth it's long been shown that it came about as a consequence of basically ignoring the overall trend in favor of focusing completely on single specific dataset that supports the supposition.

Its the equivalent of saying "The thermometer I'm holding while standing under this air conditioner is going down so the house must not really be on fire.. just ignore all the ones in the rest of the building that are bursting into flames and melting.".

With 7 billion people on earth we could easily change the planets atmosphere in any way we wish.. the caveat being it would require cooperation on an unprecedented scale.

See my first post in this thread.


That's just gobbledygook. The climate has been cooling since 1998.


No we couldn't.

Miniscule changes, yes, with infinitesimal and most likely unmeasurable impacts on climate, at best.

Global warming would be quite beneficial to mankind. There would be some losers, but the benefit would be far greater.

We are currently two and a half million years into the current ice age and are now in an interglacial warm period known as the Holocene. Prior to the Holocene, we went through roughly one hundred thousand years of glaciers and much cooler weather. Unless we can leave this ice age, we will sooner or later enter another lengthy period of widespread glaciation and very cool weather.

When the next period of glaciation begins, the Earth is going to cool down much more than the relatively brief term known as the "Little Ice Age". The Little Ice Age resulted in a great deal of hunger around the world as the productive capability of the Earth declined. With the much greater cooling that will be found during the next period of glaciation, the productive capability of the Earth is going to be a small fraction of what it was during the Little Ice Age. Starvation and Death by Starvation will be very common. The real question is which will be greater -- death by starvation or death by warfare as mankind fights furiously over the dwindling resources of the Earth.

When thinking of the future of mankind, the best we can hope for is that the Earth continues to warm and we eventually leave this ice age behind us. That said, an ice age of two and a half million years would be a miraculously short ice age. The previously known ice ages lasted anywhere from around thirty or forty million years to three or four hundred million years. If those ice ages are anything to go by, we may easily have not made it through the first ten percent of the current ice age and maybe not even one percent of the current ice age.

It is no accident that mankind took its early steps toward civilization during the Holocene Climatic Optimum when the Earth was something like four or five degrees warmer than today. Finally, mankind was able to settle down and farm and form communities.

So what happens with Global Warming?

The Earth warms up some more. The melting of ice and raising of the sea levels will be relatively slow. The best figures I've seen for the Ice Cap over Greenland is for a full melt to take about twenty thousand years. That would make sea level rise about one foot a century. That is hardly a cause for concern.

We would be able to farm land and raise crops further north as well as raise more crops in the southern areas. For example, in central Mexico you can raise two wheat crops a year instead of just one. Warm the Earth and that capability will become available further north as well. Instead of the massive loss of productivity as the Earth enters yet another period of glaciation, we would see a massive increase in productivity and a far greater ability to feed the population of the world.

Rainfall? Don't forget that during the Holocene Climatic Optimum and temperatures of about four to five degrees warmer, the Sahara Desert was green, the Gobi Desert was a forest, and northern Mexico was much wetter.

If mankind is to have a bright future, we really need Global Warming. The threat to that bright futures is the next period of glaciation, not Global Warming.

If the climate warms up, it'll certainly make the northern parts of Canada more habitable for most people. I'm a bit worried though that that might disrupt the Inuit's way of life...

I don't worry about their life being disrupted.

First of all, the change will be gradual. It's not like they wake up one morning and find that everything has changed. During any one generation, the changes will be minor.

Additionally, the lives of the people from every culture changes all the time. If they couldn't adapt to change, they wouldn't have survived this long.

Company which carry freight over the oceans have benefited. The melting of the arctic ice has opened up a Northwest passage across Canada which saves many miles of ocean transit. Ships do not have to go through the Panama Canal if they can use the Northwest Passage.

ruveyn