Global Warming. It would be nice if...

[Sleestax]

It would be nice if Global Warming could be offset by the addition of forests in the game. I have a civ in my current game that has a lot of squares between cities with access to water. I sent a worker to forest all of the non-productive squares in my sphere of influence when my civ was just entering the industrial era, but that was before I found out that it was pointless.

If Firaxis is going to put in the scientifically questionable concept of human induced global warming, then they should also allow for off-setting it with the increasing of CO2 consuming forests.

Just my .02. What's your opinion on this? Do you like the current method for Global Warming?

[itsagreenday]

If that would be done, then the initial state of the world, prior to deforestation, should be considered. Think about how much forest and jungle you (and the AI) cut down, especially into the late industrial/modern age, because plains and grassland, railroaded and either mined or irrigated, produce more than the forest. I doubt someone would reforest more than has already been taken away.

[YC4B4U]

Global warming isn't a very well developed concept in Civ 3. Where are the diplomatic channels to reduce pollution?

With respect to forestation to reduce Global Warming - I think you are going to need alot of trees...

[hzm]

SMAC had this but trees didn't have as much effect as they should have. Anyway, you should also have to keep around a certain amount of jungle squares or (something).

[Sovereign]

I agree. Global warming should be more defined, with methods to curb it.

Also, Civ3 needs terraforming, like Civ2. I've had games where there were contients with mountain ranges 7 or 8 tiles wide! No cities or nothing.

It'd be like this.


| = coast
^ = mountain
- = hill


|-^^^^^^---|||
||^^^^^^--|||
||--^^^^^^---|||
||||^^^^^^^^|||


you get the idea?

I'll post a screenshot when I get another map with screwy mountain-contients.

[Fighter]

Global Warming isnt a "shaky concept" Its a fact. The only people saying otherwise are the people trying to justify why the US backed out of Kyoto.

[metalhead]

Global warming a fact? You whackos really need to get a scientific understanding of the situation. Global warming may or may not be happening - the fact is, we don't know. It could be happening now - or, it may never happen. But I'll say this - volcanic eruptions put into the atmosphere, in one event, more "greenhouse gases" than the entire human race has put in by burning fossil fuels. Humans have raised the greenhouse gas levels in the atmosphere by less than 2%. Nature produces more than 50 times the amount of greenhouse gases than humans.

As for the Kyoto treaty, the US is NOT denying global warming as the reason for backing out. They backed out because it is completely unfair to the US. The US' productivity would be restricted far more than any other country in the treaty, and given the state of our economy that is NOT what is good for the American people.

I think that including global warming in this game is stupid. If they wanted to include environmental impact from pollution, they should have instead included more factual methods, such as poisoned groundwater causing population loss, ongoing pollution problems leading to completely unusable tiles for 20 or 50 turns, things of that nature. Getting a player to pay attention to pollution is a good idea - but calling it global warming is an insult to anyone with a fair-thinking brain. Also, the way it is implemented is stupid - I never have enough pollution to change more than a few tiles change. It has never been enough to cause me to worry about pollution.

[Demerzel]

the USA contains ~3% of the world population and causes ~25% of the world pollution iirc. maybe you guys need to cut back more than everyone else, you ever think that's why your "productivity" would be restricted?

all the other countries in the kyoto agreement have agreed to take steps to cut back emissions regardless of the financial cost to themselves. only the americans have decided to take the stupid short-term view and put themselves ahead of the environment. gfg America.

and americans wonder why they ( & their stupid president ) aren't exactly popular with the rest of the world atm.... things like trying to get out of the ICC too doesn't exactly help either but that's another matter.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by itsagreenday
I doubt someone would reforest more than has already been taken away.

Nay, nay!



** SPOILER ** GOTM10 **
Mon Cher Napoléon
http://www.zachriel.com/gotm10/ad1580-GreatForests.htm

[The Templar]

Hey Metalhead, that volcanos thing is due to Rush Limbaugh. Who if I remember correctly holds no degrees in environmental science, chemistry, materials science, geology, or environmental engineering. Rush is a flack for the Republican party (he's not even conservative when conservatism runs counter to Republican interests). Quit listening to that guy. Global warming is real. Check out the melting of the ice shelves in Anarctica or the melting of the permafrost in Alaska.

After all, if the east and west coasts are destroyed by flooding, that will only leave the conservative yahoos in fly over country. And without the costal "liberal intelligensia" to show tham which end of their boots to pour the piss out of, they'll be signing their own death warrants as well.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Demerzel
the USA contains ~3% of the world population and causes ~25% of the world pollution iirc. maybe you guys need to cut back more than everyone else, you ever think that's why your "productivity" would be restricted?

all the other countries in the kyoto agreement have agreed to take steps to cut back emissions regardless of the financial cost to themselves. only the americans have decided to take the stupid short-term view and put themselves ahead of the environment. gfg America.

and americans wonder why they ( & their stupid president ) aren't exactly popular with the rest of the world atm.... things like trying to get out of the ICC too doesn't exactly help either but that's another matter.

it's because Bush wants to help the oil companies, I'm sick of those republicans sticking their head in the sand.

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by metalhead
Global warming a fact? . . . . It has never been enough to cause me to worry about pollution.

There is little scientific doubt as to whether global warming is occuring. It is. The only uncertainty is the role that modern humans have in climate change. As humans with their cattle represent the largest biomass on land, and as the content of the atmosphere has been significantly changed, most scientists believe there is a solid connection. As far as worrying about pollution; of course not. Living in the U.S. you are protected by strong anti-pollution laws.

Here is a link to the NOAA:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html

On topic: As a game element in Civ3, global warming adds a bit of realism and a reasonable balance to unlimited growth.

[WarpStorm]

Why is Antarctica cooler that it was in 1986? Why does satellite imagery show that the Antarctic icecaps growing?

http://greennature.com/article826.html

[Wormwood]

Originally posted by Demerzel
the USA contains ~3% of the world population and causes ~25% of the world pollution iirc. maybe you guys need to cut back more than everyone else, you ever think that's why your "productivity" would be restricted?

all the other countries in the kyoto agreement have agreed to take steps to cut back emissions regardless of the financial cost to themselves. only the americans have decided to take the stupid short-term view and put themselves ahead of the environment. gfg America.

and americans wonder why they ( & their stupid president ) aren't exactly popular with the rest of the world atm.... things like trying to get out of the ICC too doesn't exactly help either but that's another matter.

You know, it is things like those points that made me use the UN flag instead of the US. God forbid anyone should think beyond the imaginary lines on a map.

[Tiberius]

Off topic:

I don't know if global warming is scientificaly proved or not, and personally I don't even care. What I do know (from my personal experience) is that, in the area where I live, the climate is increasingly fvcked up and the weather is becoming more and more extreme. I suppose this is not the right thread to discuss this in detail, but believe me, pollution is not good, is not good at all. We (humans) should do something about it, until it is not too late...

On topic:

Some diplomatic agreements to reduce pollution would be nice (I mean, in civ3)

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
Why is Antarctica cooler that it was in 1986? Why does satellite imagery show that the Antarctic icecaps growing?

Now that you brought this up:

The warmest year since records began in 1860 occurred in 1998, according to records maintained by countries that are members of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

Nine of the 10 warmest years have occurred since 1990, including 1999 and 2000; only 1998 was warmer than 2001. Average global temperatures have risen by more than 0.6 °C over the past 100 years, although the rise has not been continuous.

[WarpStorm]

Yet Antarctica is cooler (1 degree since 1986 and that is causing ecological havoc), strange, huh?

[Demerzel]

sadly Global Warming is being linked with screwing up the Gulf Stream current, which if it cooled down and stopped flowing would leave most of Northern Europe & east coast of N. America seriously in trouble. IIRC avg. temperatures would drop up to ~10C for countries that relied on the current and would leave most peeps shivering. Scarily for me, apparently Britain might suddenly face Siberian-esque temps - a fair bit of rain is bad enough, -10C is not a pleasant thought

if even a fraction of the Antarctic ice melted then sea levels worldwide would rise enough to raise sea levels a couple of metres which would right royally screw countries like Bangladesh, Holland and leave most low lying areas worldwide underwater - e.g. for Americans say bye bye to LA, etc..

[Tiberius]

Who said that it is (only) Antarctica the problem (better not wait until it becomes one!!). The weather is increasingly extreme, with severe droughts in some places and torrential storms and floods in others.
The climate is changing, and probably (if you asked me, I'd say surely) because of polution.

[Tiberius]

Demerzel is right. Paradoxically, a general global warming may result in a cooler climate in some part of the world, and the reason behind this is the Gulf Stream.

[TheStinger]

I thought it was agreed global warming was happening but the reasons were disputed

[WarpStorm]

What did warm us up from the last ice age (only 10,000 years ago), anyway? In this case I'm pretty sure it's not human pollution.

The formatting on this link is annoying, but...

http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/nerc130k.html

[itsagreenday]

Zachriel

Why would you want to forest grassland after railroad? If it has a bonus resource, mining produces 2 food, 3 shields, without, 2 food, 2 shields, IIRC. Not to mention pollution is cleaned up twice as fast.

[Demerzel]

From http://www.esd.ornl.gov/projects/qen/nerc130k.html
The unstable nature of the Earth's climate history suggests that it may be liable to change suddenly in the future. By putting large quantities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, humans are exerting pressure on the climate system which might produce a drastic change without much prior warning. As the geologist W.S. Broecker has said, "Climate is an ill-tempered beast, and we are poking it with sticks".

As it says, the Earth's climate is unstable but we're not exactly helping are we with all the crap thats being pumped into the atmosphere?

That's exactly why we need to cut back on the amount of pollutants that are being emitted. Stupid President Bush. Pity Gore didn't get in, at least he had a foreign policy, could have done a better job so far and couldn't have pissed off the world as much as Bush has.

Hmm mebbe too much anti-American rhetoric, must remember to tone it down in future, it's just that Bush is just so stupid at times.

[WarpStorm]

Why forest? Maybe to slow down invaders.

[Thrawn05]

What I did in my mod, is the oceans can "evaporate" away. Here is how I lad out this system:

Ocean turns to Sea, Sea turns to Coast, Coast turns to Desert.


Pretty nifty uh.


To tell you the truth, I only saw it happened once, but if your willing to play a game for a year (the game years are in the 10000s AD), then in the end, there should all desert and no water.

[Traelin]

Originally I had made this post lengthy, but apparently my session had timed out and my message was erased. A lot of you couldn't be more wrong about global warming. Check out http://www.globalwarming.org/brochure.html for more info. What a lot of you are forgetting is that we have, on a geological timescale, just exited an Ice Age. Of course the temperatures are going to rise in such a scenario!

Also, nothing inflames me more than a bunch of uninformed Euros telling me, an American, why we didn't sign the Kyoto Treaty. Umm, how about doing a bit of research? The U.S. Senate voted 95-0 against signing it because the severest of penalties are put on the DEVELOPED countries, but there are no restrictions on DEVELOPING countries. Hrm OK, so our economy suffers, but the developing countries have no restrictions on their progress?

By the way, I don't think I've ever posted here before, but I'm REALLY sick of people bashing my country. Next time a disaster occurs in Europe, don't come begging the U.S. for help. Like when we rescued France from immiment doom in WW2 and in 1957 (I think that was the year). Or when we send our volunteers to help Earthquake victims in Turkey. For once I'd like to see you all do something to help us, instead of incessantly whining.

'Nuff said.

[Tiberius]

I say Firaxis made it (somehow) right. Turning plains in desert, even if enoying, is pretty much realistic. Too bad they stopped here and let the whole thing unfinished.

[WarpStorm]

Of course the poking with sticks portion of the artcle is inconsistent with the general tone of the whole piece. Only in the next to the last and last sentences (the portion you quoted) does it even mention that mankind could have had anything to do with the major climactic changes in the past 130,000 years. Kind of like a political spin tacked on at the end. It even says that not that long ago (8000-4500 years ago) the earth was warmer and wetter (the Sahara grasslands) than currently.

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Traelin
The U.S. Senate voted 95-0 against signing it because the severest of penalties are put on the DEVELOPED countries, but there are no restrictions on DEVELOPING countries.

This is the best joke I've heard today. They are against it because the oil companies would suffer from it.

Why don't you take it this way:

If the scientists got it wrong, the only thing the Kyoto agreement will do is to somehow reduce pollution and speed up the use of alternative energy. There is a cost, yes, but
if they are right and we do nothing - we are all finished.