Hot Planet

Hot Planet

2009, Environment  -   132 Comments
6.68
12345678910
Ratings: 6.68/10 from 56 users.

Hot PlanetProfessors Iain Stewart and Professor Kathy Sykes take a timely look at global warming ahead of the Copenhagen summit, exploring the world's leading climate scientists' vision of the planet's future.

Scientists predict that if global temperatures continue to rise at their current rate, Earth will be one degree warmer within 10 years, two degrees warmer within the next 40 years and three degrees or more warmer before the end of the century.

If the Earth's temperature increases to three degrees warmer than the average pre-industrial temperature, the impact on the planet will be catastrophic. Across the Earth, ways of life could be lost forever as climate change accelerates out of control. This isn't inevitable, however: climate change is not yet irreversible.

Ingenious technology and science is currently being devised, advanced and tested around the world which could offer solutions for a sustainable future. The question that remains is, can the world embrace and implement them on a large enough scale within an effective time-line?

If widespread damage to human societies and ecosystems is to be prevented, global temperature rise must be slowed and eventually reversed. Hot Planet offers an accurate visual prediction of the planet's future, based on the findings of over 4,000 climate scientists.

More great documentaries

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

132 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Toby
Toby
3 years ago

Humans are functionally extinct.

1StoicSeneca4ever
1StoicSeneca4ever
8 years ago

Yes sir Mr. Preetan Rai...Cudos to you! Any warming we are experiencing has everything to do with the Sun, & absolutely nothing to do with Man. Accept for the greedy Men in positions of power, creating a fear motivator, so they can charge all the idiots a Carbon Tax. What straight forward BS! Thank you Mr. Preetan Rai. My you continue to live a long, prosperous, life further enhanced by your wisdom.

Preetam Rai
Preetam Rai
8 years ago

All over 4,000 climate scientists are fools......!

Alexander Owen Spencer
Alexander Owen Spencer
10 years ago

@drsandman2:disqus How about you actually do research. Peter speaks the truth, I can see you are a sheeple by the fact that you say "all the scientists" you must have watch an Inconvenient Truth and ate it up never to look into the subject again. The IPCC is not the leading authorities on climate, they were actually created in 1988 with the goal of examining GLOBAL COOLING LOL. Look into it, in the 70's and 80's the IPCC was absolutely convinced that we were headed for an Ice Age. Then in the late 90's they shifted gears to Global Warming instead so they could keep their funding. Also take a look at this years winter Arctic sea ice levels, they are the HIGHEST IN RECORDED HISTORY. As a final note in regards to this doc, polar bears have been unchanged for 300,000 years and yet they have been through both heat ages and ice ages, why would they die off now when we are actually at a lower global temp than in previous heat ages they survived?

Peter Ekelund
Peter Ekelund
11 years ago

and for he last 16 years the climate have ben getting cooler. carbon dioxide have nothing to do with "global warming" carbon dioxide dont drive global warming, global warming drives carbon dioxide. after some research these type of films is actually realy interesting

realitygirl
realitygirl
11 years ago

Global warming or not, we still need to clean up our act. Typical humans - spending trillions trying to bury the problem instead of trillions to change our ways. The powers that be don't want to clean up their ways - too much profits involved.

Jallen
Jallen
11 years ago

They should also mention that ALL planets in the solar system are currently warming up.

Jallen
Jallen
11 years ago

Why are they asking us to reduce co2 when the Governments and industry are responsible for it, not us.

brianrose87
brianrose87
11 years ago

I don't want to be a contrarian; indeed, I'm not a contrarian on this subject, but we should keep in mind the history of climate events.

A prescient example is the Toba eruption 75,000 years ago. This volcanic eruption immediately led to a 3-5 C reduction in global mean temperatures. A massive species die off, and the near extinction of Homo sapiens.

Just 75,000 years later (the blink of a geologic eye), and the planet's species diversity has completely recovered; Homo sapiens population has gone from as low as 1,000 after the eruption (we truly barely made it) to 7,000,000,000 today.

Is it possible that the global mean temperature will rise by 6 C over the next century? Yes, if we do nothing, which we haven't. Will this have severe impacts on global species diversity and quality of life for us humans? Yes. Will it herald the worst catastrophe in Earth's history? No.

We have a tremendous capability to minimize the impacts of climate change, and it is our duty, not our childrens, to address the issue. However, to paint our predicament as a choice about the fate of the planet is specious if not outright propaganda.

I understand that many feel a strong message must be iterated to compel the masses toward change, but I refuse to believe that masking hyperbole as fact is righteous. Tell people that the end is nigh unless we change our ways, and skepticism, not action, will manifest.

Many push alternative energy without realizing that it is economic growth that is the fundamental issue. Infinite growth on a finite planet is scientifically impossible. A transition to alternative energy does not change this. For example, the increase in methane output from ruminants (due to increasing wealth, and thus demand, from emerging economies) would nullify any transition to wind or solar. Remember that methane is an ~18 times more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2. Not to mention that the construction of wind mills and solar panels requires rare earth metals, which are extremely costly (in terms of pollution and CO2 emissions) to mine. This issue is more complex than these shows confess.

Our global economy requires economic growth to function, but that growth is the very noose that tightens around our civilization daily.

Tony Lam Tran
Tony Lam Tran
11 years ago

What I don't like about the documentary is its brief touch on the delicate nature of various ecosystems. The documentary acknowleges alternative methods of power sources such as Solar power or Wind Energy, but does not present the negative effects it has on Nature itself. By using the lands that are uninhabitable by humans to create these solar power plants, we are essentially forcing groups of species to migrate to other regions where the environment is less favourable for the survival of certain species. The topic of climate change is very controversial and delicate. Nevertheless, a great documentary to develop our further understanding of climate changes as Global Citizens.

phillip wong
phillip wong
11 years ago

pp

Darren Johnson
Darren Johnson
11 years ago

what they should do is take the CO2 emissions that are being/can be saved and fill some sort of massive tubing and use it to create floating islands like sol in south Korea. That way if the ice caps do flood we can just be safely adrift :)

Scott McGiffid
Scott McGiffid
12 years ago

As soon as I discovered the Goldman Sachs would be the main entity brokering the trading of carbon credits; I knew global warming is and was a scam.

Ellen Malmin
Ellen Malmin
12 years ago

Good film - how come that most solar stocks went down with 70 to 80% here in 2011, are there someone trying to sabotage the transition towards a more sustinable furture? Can we put the blame on Wall Street cynical profit oriented personalities working there?

DReadrush
DReadrush
12 years ago

Please, is MrIceland seriously pointing people to that well documented piece of baseless propaganda 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'? And telling us about about a single coldest night at his place (in the last 10 years, which have been in the 11 hottest since instrumental recording began in the 1880s)? Why indeed do we have The Great Global Warming Swindle on the site - I understand need for balance on such sites (and perhaps some historic perspective on the tactics of biased sceptics), but this unfounded propaganda has been well debunked by many and more learned individuals and groups. The Royal Society calls the polemic itself a ‘swindle’, of course it was lambasted by the IPCC, together with the British Antarctic Survey and many respected scientists (including some scientists misrepresented in the 'documentary'), and even Ofcom ruled, admittedly not going far enough, that the film committed multiple breaches of the broadcasting code. But I suppose these learned people are all mindlessly defending their pet conspiracy?

Czarina Tan
Czarina Tan
12 years ago

What a great documentary to make people realize how important our environment is.

« - - -
« - - -
12 years ago

Im seriously moving to any of those cities

Road Hammer
Road Hammer
12 years ago

this guy's accent doing my head. where is guy coming from, there is anybody there to speak little proper? I was ok for first 5 min but got tired of his RRRR eeerrrraaeeeerrrr kind of accent. I dont know, maybe its me upset tonight a little.

Frank Snapp
Frank Snapp
12 years ago

Big problems and big opportunities:

Big problem: methane burp is coming. The estimates of hitting the 3C by the end of the century are entirely over optimistic for so many reasons; but mostly related to positive feedback loops. It is very likely that methane burps from tunda and boreal sources, as well as from forests growing in warmer than normal climate will trigger the big jump to 10C to even 18C probably by the end of the 21st Century. There are a number of positive feeback looks that would contribute to this apparently more cynical but much more factually likely projection. Arctic Sea Ice is probably gone in less than 10 years from now. The full melting of the majority of Greenland continental ice mass is likely within 25 years, not within 150 years or whatever the current least conservative estimate is. Disinformation or missinformation is not just the perview of military, corporate, covert information sources and everything is infected by it.

Big opportunities well described hear and there by this documentary, are the diversity of solutions possible. Time to release the creativity of more than just 1% of the citizens of the planet that have any hope of even the beginning access to education of the higher sort. We need the creativity and stewarding activities of the majority of the current 7B humans. Overall, I give this documentary a B-. Some good little known ideas discussed, but too much credit paid to status quos that are destroying the planet. Nuclear is a good example. This video was perhaps made pre-Fukushima, I suspect.

Cheers

Guest
Guest
12 years ago

i love the way all these ppl fly all around the world discussing global warming...

sirpikey
sirpikey
12 years ago

We dont have to change nature it has got it all sorted .Has had a few million years to get it right .Rather than queastioning it why dont we imbrace the fact that nature knows what it is doing ?

awful_truth
awful_truth
12 years ago

After watching the documentary, and reading the blogs below, I am more convinced then ever that there is no solution that will work. Trapping co2 emmissions in sandstone??? To begin with, co2 emisssions are not the cause of global warming. The poles on Mars are presently melting as well, and I am certain humans are not to blame for it. Since the sun is obviously heating up, any solution we can conjure up is meaningless. This is not to say that we aren't poisoning the biosphere, only that a lot of nonsense is being spewed by the so called 'experts'.
The two gentlemen below can''t even be civil with one another, and they both apparently care about the planet, so what is the problem? Simply put, the cancer of humanity only prides itself on wealth, and since those in control will go to any length to continue the status quo of greed, my advice is quit fighting with each other, and direct your attention towards those who have been robbing you blind since the inception of society. My advice is quit worrying about the planet, and start looking out for each other, and the problems will take care of themselves. Since we are incapable of saving each other, how could anyone truly believe we are going to save the planet.
The awful truth is a billion years from now, the Earth will be baking as the sun expands in size due to it's elderly age. Your time would be better spent watching George Carlin on youtube speaking about ' saving the planet'. It was recorded 30 years ago, and has more truth then the nonsense I just watched. Besides, we are not talking about saving the planet, we are talking about saving ourselves. If all this is too depressing for everyone, then get off your butts and do something about it, otherwise, relax, have fun, get yourself fixxed, and quit bringing anymore innocent children into this nightmare until such time when we truly act appropriately.

StillRV
StillRV
12 years ago

Thanks Vlatko. My apologies To you. Feel free to wipe the posts. Really Was not expecting that nonsense.

Vlatko
Vlatko
12 years ago

OK guys, I think it's enough.

StillRV
StillRV
12 years ago

Pardon I said Brazil not Amazon. My mother passed away long ago. And as for the Derps that is your thing as evidenced on a number of comment sections here on top docs. You have destroyed nothing in your interaction with me here as you have simply degraded to childish name calling and cursing. I am more than happy with an end to your responses. I am sure I will see you crop up with your insightfull imput on many more docs here in your usual form of insult slinging gibberish. Im sure there are three billygoats trip tropping your bridge you need to go harrangue now so take care.

natasha0
natasha0
12 years ago

Hang on a second, this has been been happening far before our influence.
Yes we could also be more efficient, We certainly have the current technology. But do we have motivation as a whole species to change, unfortunately not... Looks like there will have to come a moment where we have no choice.

StillRV
StillRV
12 years ago

A; Those forests were not replanted they propagated on their own in the natural order of things.
B; this can be observed in all places I have visited from parts of Europe to the majority of the US.
C; Do some research into what they are finding in south and central America in those regions they are logging. Man made irrigation structures and mounds as old as Mesopotamia. Ancient enough for you? (sigh) Those areas were once cleared for agriculture in the past and the world kept turning. But you are right those who live in third world nations should be forced by the rest of the world to stay that way so that we can feel better about the ecological state of the planet. Why should places like Brazil have a source of income? Let alone a right to (gasp) use their environment and their resources to grow and prosper as a nation. I don't see you throwing your stones at anyone but the US. Is that because the UK developed long enough ago to be overlooked? Or because China who is industrializing faster than any nation could care less what you think? Or because the media of today tells you it's cool to be edgy and anti US? Hey why not protest the actions of Mexico for strip mining. Or tie yourself to a tree in the amazon to prevent a farmer from clearing space for a farm? Ohh yea because they want to live and prosper and have a chance at a life like you have in your cozy flat sitting on your ever expanding back side woofing down your chips and preaching on the internet. And they are willing to drive the bulldozer right over you to get it.

Mac
Mac
12 years ago

It makes me so mad how no matter what any of you say here nothing will change, our beautiful world is still dying, humans are destroying this planet, but of course who am I? I'm just a 17 year old kid who no-one would listen to, but I'm smart enough to know that we need things to change and right now! But the worst part is the people who "lead" our countries are just idiots, if they really wanted to they could save this world by actually changing things for the better.

StillRV
StillRV
12 years ago

Ok Some of you did not believe my earlier response. So For you I will give supporting information. It should honestly not be necessary to point this out. You complain that cows produce methane (as do goats pigs etc.) and that our carnivorous needs have created a cow population that is endangering the global environment with its farts. [honestly can't believe I had to type such a insane sentence] Well Herbivores such as cows pigs goats etc. produce said methane as a result of diet. By putting all of humanity on the cows diet we will become the destructive farting apocalypse instead of the cows. On a side note to that, The vast heard of wild buffalo in the US prior to westward expansion was greater in number than are todays domesticated cattle. And lets not delve int the enormous ozone depleting terror that was know as bracheosaurus. Animal farts are not ending the world.

As to there being more trees now than there were hundreds of years ago. This is fact. Modern industrial farming methods have replaced the prior practice of small holdings, sharecropping, and subsistence agriculture. Due to that ability of the plains areas such as the American Midwest to produce sufficient crops more forests have been allowed to regrow. I live in New York state. Contrary to your implication that I do not get out much, I spend the vast majority of my time not at work hiking camping and exploring very deep into the forests. And what I see out there often are the remains of stone walls in the middle of tree filled regions. These are not walls made by some wild woodsman who felt like stacking rocks. They are stones pulled from agricultural fields. Massive quantities of what is now forested land was once clear cut farm land and the evidence of that is there for any and all to see as well as land records from the past that show how many acres upon acres of land were farms that are now absolutely full of trees. On a side note to that. Old growth forest actually has fewer trees in it than does new growth forest. The entire biomass of is even higher. Which in turn means that it actually recaptures more carbon dioxide than does old growth. In the space taken by one 60' tall oak one could easily have 20 20' maples. That's how forests work. If you don't believe me look it up. Look at the huge amount of growth that takes place when just one canopy tree falls in a rain forest.

So you see there was no disinformation there at all. Just facts that come from scientific texts compiled by researchers and field specialists who publish their scientifically backed work in scientific journals and not on some rainbow bedazzled Utopian dream web site with links to pot articles and the tour dates for Phish concerts. Ohh and lets not forget the web pages put out by persons who are heavily invested in carbon offsetting schemes running on the fear sweat of guilty consciences. Shall we talk about how carbon offsetting works? Some corporate demon pays a percentage of their revenue to the corrupt government of some third world nation to "keep it's lands pristine and untouched" [translation; halt development in countries where starvation illness and poverty kill thousands]. That Off setting of untouched wild is the exchange offered the developed nations and its people to assuage their guilt for "destroying our planet". This scheme was employed once before by the Catholic church, they called it indulgence. Where by the church would sell some guilt ridden soul a get out of jail free card, which in actual value amounted to nothing but somehow made the poor ignorant schlub feel better. It worked well then and it seems like it's gonna work well again now. Funny even the threat is the same. If you don't give us money you are gonna end up in a hot place.

So please save me the misinformed hippie rhetoric on the web. The hypocrisy of people who set themselves up as crusaders for the environment on a machine with petroleum based plastic casings and keyboards, silicone chips and "Blood coltan" components powered electrically by their local coal/oil/nuclear power plant is staggeringly amusing.

I truly am sorry if you are offended by my words. I love the environment too. I don't litter I have a big garden and I live lightly. However I just cannot stand preachy environuts who spout whatever nonsense Big Al feeds them. If you would like to learn more about nature and the world we live in stop visiting those web sites, go to the library and pick up forest census studies and the like. That facts are there.

wald0
wald0
12 years ago

@ Rich McAdam

"excuse my chemistry ignorance but is it not quite easy to separate carbon and oxygen and use the carbon in someway? i'd be interested to hear anyones thoughts or knowledge."

The short answer is no. It is difficult to even collect carbon dioxide and even harder to seperate. The reason is that it is such a stable molecule, check out a lewis structure of the molecule and you will see what I mean. You have two double only very slightly polar covalent bonds extending from the carbon to the two oxygens. Oxygen is just barely more electro negative than carbon, but its such a slight difference it's not worth mentioning. Carbons most stable oxydation states are 2 and 4, oxygens most stable oxydation state is -2, the two atoms fit like an electro static glove. In other words seperating them is an uphill (non-spontaneous) reaction, just as the molecule's birth was a spontaneous or downhill reaction. Uphill reactions have to be driven by some type of energy from start to finish. Right now that energy comes from fossil fuels that create more CO2. In the end you end up with a net increase in CO2 emmisions caused by the seperation procedure. Here is what the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center has to say ont he subject. You can google "separating carbon from carbon dioxide" and get the article.

"The problem in separating the carbon and oxygen from CO2 is that CO2 is a VERY stable molecule, because of the bonds that hold the carbon and oxygen together, and it takes a lot of energy to separate them. Most schemes being considered now involve conversion to liquid or solids. One present concept for capturing CO2, such as from flue gases of boilers, involves chemical reaction with MEA (monoethanol amine). Other techniques include physical absorption; chemical reaction to methanol, polymers and copolymers, aromatic carboxylic acid, or urea; and reaction in plant photosynthetic systems (or synthetic versions thereof). Overcoming energetic hurdles is a major challenge; if the energy needed to drive these reactions comes from burning of fossil fuels, there may not be an overall gain. One aspect of the current research is the use of catalysts to promote the reactions. (In green plants, of course, chlorophyll is such a catalyst!) One area of current research is looking at using cellular components to imitate photosynthesis on an industrial scale.

The reason I was so interested in your question is that my chemistry degree is geared to ecological concerns and this is something my university, The University of North Alabama UNA, is currently engaged in research on. We are looking into Co2 storage actually insted of seperation techniques. But, in my humble opinion seperation will be the way to go in the future. The main issue is the energy it takes to drive such a non-spontaneous reaction. I we have to get that energy through traditional means there is no net decrease in Co2 emmissions. Good question though, that's the kind of thinking we need. Not just sweeping it under the rug by storing under ground, but actually reclaiming a valuable raw material and creating jobs while reducing environmental concerns. The key is understanding the cellular mechanics and chemistry of green plants that turn carbon dioxide and sun light into glucose and oxygen via photosynthesis. There is tons of research going into this right now.

eyecandy_babydoll
eyecandy_babydoll
12 years ago

funny.. because it's freezing, cold and wet here in Sydney Australia. Our government built a desalination plant a few years ago fearing that our state will be going through long periods of drought caused by global warming. Then lo & behold, the weather changed and we've had the coldest and wettest seasons in 70 years. Water levels are so good, the desalination plant is now useless - the government threw millions of tax payers dollars into this. Another state, Queensland was flooded in some parts earlier this year.

Now the government wants to bring on a carbon tax because of global warming "advisers". Even though Australia makes small carbon footprint impact, we'll be paying the world's HIGHEST carbon tax. Of course, this isn't going to stop global warming unless China & India comes to the table, but heck the Australian government wants to drive the country into the dark ages. In reality, the government is broke - that's what the "carbon tax" is really about, they need money to cover the million dollar mistakes they made (example: desalination plant for global warming drought that didn't happen as predicted)

Yavanna
Yavanna
12 years ago

Let's make fake tree's to asborb CO2!!!!! Let's squirt it into porous rock!!!

Derp Let's stop cutting down tree's and grow more of them!

We eat too many cows and the livestock industry creates 18 pct of the emissions? Well f&ck me sideways what can we do?

Derp. Eat more vegetables perhaps?

It isn't rocket science, but the globailsts want us to think it is. The biggest problem that faces us today is greed and over population. How about rationalising profits and cutting down on over-breeding theists or at the very least stop rewarding them with child support payments.

Why should a person who is good at hitting a ball with a metal stick earn a million or more times the average income and why should we in general have to support 'needy' families who want 6+ kids?

We need a license to drive a car, to fish, for a TV (in the UK at least) yet people can pump out kids by the dozen.

Two or three generations of sensible action would solve our problems. I insist on being voted in as world president immediately!

Yes we can!

KsDevil
KsDevil
12 years ago

A bit of a dramatic sell, but the information presented was fairly correct. I noticed there was no mention of the frozen methane at the bottom of the oceans. Once that melts, the tipping point will be evident.
Still, it is clear that the increase in greenhouse gasses in such a short time that corelate with the rise of th oil based economy of the planet is enhancing the natural climatic cycle.
But fear not. We are in the age of peak oil and soon enough all of the excess carbon released into the atmosphere will going away.
And, yes, the carbon tax is a scheme that takes advantage of the situation. Never let a crisis pass you by to make some money.

panthera
panthera
12 years ago

People who don't believe it: open your eyes.
I am happy I don't have children: succes to the rest of you.

Rich McAdam
Rich McAdam
12 years ago

excuse my chemistry ignorance but is it not quite easy to separate carbon and oxygen and use the carbon in someway? i'd be interested to hear anyones thoughts or knowledge.

good documentary - cant help but wonder how much input governments have in the production of these programs..... not that i feel that this gave any dis-information... maybe i've just become a little paranoid . .

:)

PavolvsBitch
PavolvsBitch
12 years ago

To hell with it. Right now, the Great Barrier Reef is being dredged. A World Heritage Site; the most sensitive areas of the water basin is being polluted through gas mining (fracking) and such projects are going on silently off radar all over the world. This is not a viable option of any value and the wanton destuction of the water basin and the soil which will never be in a conditon to produce food or support life. Chemtrails are vomited in stupendous quantities all over the world without a murmur from these jerks.

Weather Modification, Weather Warfare, H.A.A.R.P. Scalar, GMO and they wonder 'gosh' that the climate (which is always changing) is becoming unpredictable. Winkers. Carbon Tax is the biggest bad joke in the history of this disastrous 'civilisation' amid ferocious competition. Oh, all right, neck and neck with the IMF.

combination
combination
12 years ago

I am more worried about the pollution...

Jacob Burchfield
Jacob Burchfield
12 years ago

I'm concerned about global warming, but I'm more worried about when the ice sheets come back.

magarac
magarac
12 years ago

Of cause it is true that the climate has been changing ever since the formation of our planet. And all that change over billions of years of cause is the reason for the extinction and even the creation of countless numbers of species.
The only difference this time is that we are the once who are responsible for the change and that we not only threaten the existence of certain species but even our very own.

combination
combination
12 years ago

I saw a docu, where they proofed that CO2 levels rises because the T° rises, not the other way around.

If you look to the graphiq you first see t° rise and followed by CO2 rise...

tomregit
tomregit
12 years ago

@ Jeremy
There is nothing wrong with questioning how much of the earth's current warming cycle is due to human activity, but the smallest amount of research would tell you that, when measuring CO2 output, ALL of the volcanoes around the world produce less than 1% of that generated by human activity ( from the US Geological Survey). If, as you state, CO2 levels are 30% higher that does not mean temperatures should rise by the same proportion. Your foolish assertions do your argument no favour and may call into question your intellectual honesty and/or intelligence.
@Branefart
I grew up in Alberta and lived there for over forty years. What you say is nonsense. Throughout history, there have been both bone chilling cold winters and unusually mild winters. This is not climate change; it is a weather pattern.
@ Suzanne
Yes, "nearly all scientists believe in global warming". It is a measurable fact. The idea worth questioning is the cause.
@ Benjamin Clarkson
This is NOT the hottest this planet has ever been. You should check on the veracity of your statements, or anything else you say will rightly be viewed with contempt.
@ Anthony Pirtle
"Wow, the 'skeptics' are out on this one"
Yes, why shouldn't they be? I don't know the cause of global warming. The earth has gone through dozens of ice ages and periods much warmer than now. I believe human activity certainly has some bearing on what's happening but the jury is out on just how much. Limiting and phasing out our use of fossil fuels makes good sense for many reasons, but doing so may have little effect on climate change.

combination
combination
12 years ago

I worry because everuthing that human's invented had worse consequences for nature and our health.

We like to think that we now everything, but we don't.

We can not even clean our own mess, how do you think you can controle the climate???

It's verry short sited vieuw, to put your responsibilty away on the goverment in the hope they find the ultimate solution.

Gues what, there already is... it's called nature.

David Hawkins
David Hawkins
12 years ago

Perhaps arcologies are the answer? Or maybe that's the equivalent of sweeping the problem under the carpet!

Yeah, I like Iain Stewart as a presenter but his body language was quite intense in this one - made me a little on edge...

Kumamori
Kumamori
12 years ago

The document description about what haooens if earth warms up 3 degrees is exaggerated: it would be just good for us if things got warmer, for you could farm more stuff in ghe north. I know people in the hottest areas may think it's a threat and of course they got a good reason, but three more degrees isn't gonna ruin your plantations is they're done the natural way, not the plow-the-field way. Getting shade from trees and building water storing systems is what you need, not some carbon tax nor advanced tech to manipulate the weather.

BeardHero420
BeardHero420
12 years ago

Ian Stewart needs to relax.

BTW I'm selling carbon credits, anybody need?

sandz
sandz
12 years ago

Yep, carbon tax is the give away. The Earth has had major periods of cooling and warming in the past, and will do in the future, with or without people. It's not global warming that I am denying, but the reasons given for it and the solution: carbon tax. I live in Africa, a continent that has bought into global warming and carbon tax (USA has still not signed the Kyoto Protocol) - obey the masters you know! We need money for education, houses, food, clean water. Does anyone know what will be done with this carbon tax? Supply jobs for people in the developed world (administration and policing) and become yet another 'commodity' to be traded on stock markets?

AndyA121
AndyA121
12 years ago

I think the warming is a natural occurrence. Taxing people is not going to help or slow it down but green energy is meant to be free.

Branefart
Branefart
12 years ago

It was +4c here in Alberta with zero snow. 5 to 10 years ago it would have been -20c with 4 feet of snow by now. It's obvious something is happening.

dekay49
dekay49
12 years ago

hmmmmm, I knew there was something fishy about this global warming....that is probably why my pipes froze and burst last winter here in Florida......... go figure This is nothing but another scam to bilk even more money out of people with a non existent threat that if we don't do something, all will be lost gimme a break

combination
combination
12 years ago

I think they can do more damage then good... look to the history...

Nature will find her balance if we let her just do.

What we need to change is the way we live.