Runner
The difference between you and me Runner is that I am only interested in the facts. In Australia we have a serious problem with storm surges and high rainfall events (also droughts but that’s another story). This becomes a huge issue if you live near sea level, just look at the losses that occurred in Brisbane during the 2010-11 floods, which caused some $2.38 billion damage. The problem is certainly not confined to Australia you only have to look at what happened to New Orleans in 2005 when hurricane Katrina hit or when Hurricane Sandy hit New York in 2012. The difference between a flood levie or sea wall being just high enough and just being overtoped can be catastrophic.

The relevant points are:-

1 Global warming plus pollution can dramatically increase the potential amount of rain that is likely to fall in any given time interval. Clouds need dust particles to form.

2 The difference between being slightly flooded and not flooded matters a great deal, so even a small sea level rise is important.

3 Storms derive much of their energy from the amount of water vapour available due to latent. A 1 deg C increase in temperature translates to the potential for the air to hold 17% more water vapour. So we now have the potential for higher rainfall events and stronger winds and in turn stronger storm surges.

'morning warmair,

Funny things facts are they not. You like facts but not those of the IPCC? The following from the AR5 report that make you look like person who can't deal with facts.

Funny that.

The IPCC AR5 notes the lack of warming since 1998:

AR5: Confidence remains low for long-term (centennial) changes in tropical cyclone activity, after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities.

IPCC AR5 Report

In summary, the current assessment concludes that there is not enough evidence at present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in drought or dryness (lack of rainfall) since the middle of the 20th century, due to lack of direct observations, geographical inconsistencies in the trends, and dependencies of inferred trends on the index choice. Based on updated studies, AR4 conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated. However, it is likely that the frequency and intensity of drought has increased in the Mediterranean and West Africa and decreased in central North America and north-west Australia since 1950.

Strange isn't it warmair that none of our recent floods in South East Queensland have approached those of the late eighteen hundreds.

The hunter has had nothing like those regular floods of the 1950s, & the Northern Territory rivers have not had a decent fresh in them for almost as long.

It is no longer any use you folk having these convenient losses of memory old chap. In this day & age, when we can no longer trust academics or bureaucrats to tell the truth, most of their past figures & pronouncements are carefully recorded by many who have learned. Tell lies & someone will have the facts of your previous statements & measurement records to show you up.

Hasbeen
In this case I agree with you the electric car is not practicable at this stage because of range and cost of batteries.

On the other hand the electric bicycle appears to be quite a useful mode of transport and affordable, but you still need to be aware of the potential problems.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/05/whatswrongwith-electric-bicycles/

The cordless electric mower comes in somewhat more expensive than the fuel fossil fuel alternative and if anyone is considering one they need to make sure new battery packs are available and affordable, also will it do the required area in on one charge. I think the idea of a robo mower which would do the whole job itself might be a goer.

Good afternoon Spindoc

A few points:-

I did not make any claims about droughts.

Quote
“AR5: Confidence remains low for long-term (centennial) changes in tropical cyclone activity, after accounting for past changes in observing capabilities.”

I do not claim that their will be more cyclones, only that on average they will be stronger and produce higher rainfall. This based on straight forward physics and the way the atmosphere works. Temperature have risen since the 1970s and sea surface temperatures have also risen. That means a greater potential amount of water vapour in the air.

good afternoon Hasbeen

Since the floods of the late eighteen hundreds there has been work done to mitigate flooding such as the Wivenhoe Dam, but in any event rising sea levels are going to make the problem worse.

morning warmair,

Sorry to be such a pest and I can see you’re really busy with your “Rear guard action”, but you did miss the IPCC’s bit about NO global warming. Which if I might put it kindly, is the whole basis for your case, since there is NO global warming you appear to have lost the core of your argument, but that’s just me.

You also missed the bit from the IPCC AR5 report that again contradicts you on rainfall, or as the IPCC puts it “drought or dryness (lack of rainfall)”. Whereas your science is telling us there will be “more cyclones that on average they will be stronger and produce higher rainfall”?

Look warmair, I know to you it’s just “straight forward physics and the way the atmosphere works” But I can’t help thinking that you might just want to write a letter of complaint to the IPCC.

If the IPCC contradicts you on these and other assertions, and also the number of cyclones has in fact decreased, it sort of, you know, how can I put this without causing offence?

Well to be quite frank warmair, it makes you look like right old tosser.

Can you copy us in on OLO when you write your complaint to the IPCC?

Much appreciated and the very best of luck.