The worst thing is that we can't stop it when it will be too late. This doesn't work like a switch. Even if we would drastically cut all CO2 emission those levels would not drop in our lifetimes.
Water is only one problem. By 2070 some places might be uninhabitable according to this[1] study, due to heat.
> At WBTs [wet bulb temperature] above 35C, the high heat and humidity make it physically impossible for even the fittest human body to cool itself by sweating, with fatal consequences after six hours. For less fit people, the fatal WBT is below 35C. A WBT temperature of 35C – the combination of 46C heat and 50% humidity – was almost reached in Bandar Mahshahr in Iran in July 2015.
At some point it's going to cost big bucks. If the study holds water, the Gulf will either need to be evacuated or artificial habitation will need to be built.
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/26/extreme-...
The negative knee-jerk reaction of my fellow Greens on this matter is is only topped by our anti-nuclear power rhetoric.
Global adoption of LFTR reactors combined with the massive reduction in coal/oil power plants, ocean iron seeding and the adoption of electric vehicles should get global C02 levels close to pre-industrial levels within 200 years, if we start today.
I'm a huge fan of gen IV reactors in general and LFTR in particular, but we are a long way from being able to deploy any MSRs, even if everyone woke up tomorrow and suddenly took the construction of LFTRs as a terminal moral value. All that have been created to date are small research reactors, mostly 40+ years ago. Almost all of the MSR research projects started recently have fizzled out; AFAIK the only project that has any kind of plan for future civilian nuclear energy is China's. The current regulatory and public opinion environment for civil reactors is absolutely abysmal, and that will likely take even longer to change than the research will.
Half of us are in denial, half of us are doing ineffective things, and half of us are in China.
He claims people are global warming deniers and uses ice cores to prove the case, only he's an idiot for not realizing that MOST of the people he's referring to are not denying that the earth is warming up, rather they're clearly saying that it is the impact/outcome where there is a disagreement.
He consistently and unjustifiably uses answers for peripheral problems to debate core arguments which only destroys his credibility. I could only watch for so long... I just had to stop, it was hurting that much.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climate-Change-The-40-Year-D...