Are there any parts of the world that benefit from climate change?

In Canada the growing season will be longer and resource extraction would be easier with the permafrost gone.

@RedDeerGuy1 Except the softening is causing buildings to collapse and permafrost is becoming non-arable permamud. Plus arctic species are disappearing.

Climate change is rapid disruption, faster than places can adapt.

I am sure there are, but most will never hear of it because the powers that be, want it believed that climate change (rebranding from Global Warming) is everywhere, will be devastating, and caused by man.

It is everywhere and it is caused by man.

@Hypocrisy_Central “The Powers That Be” are two house of Congress that refuse to agree with the proven science.

It’s not a “proven science” part of it is natural and that’s a fact. The human caused part is there too but the relative amount is up for debate. Does not mean we should not do the right thing and clean our act up. Some place will certainly benefit. Added c02 is good for plant growth and watming in areas does extend the types of crops that can be grown.

Absolutely. The Department of Energy calculated utility expenses for heating and cooling would go down in the Northeast US.
The growing season would increase so produce can be more varied. The Great Lakes moderate temperatures and supply a lot of moisture to the area.

Antarctica might have more livable land.

Hell. Global warming is well-suited to hell’s climate.

If there really were such a place, don’t you think we’d all be going there for what we’ve done to this exquisite gift of a planet?

It has been known for a long time that America’s cheap food is because of an unusual spell of warm weather following the dust bowl days. They emphasize that it is not due to any combination of fertilizer and improved machinery, it is entirely due to warm weather that keeps on keeping on. But it was not until the 80s that people started talking about “global warming”, and scientists argued for thirty years or so about whether there was any such thing.

We have this prophecy we call Armageddon. The USA is prominently absent from the story. The country must collapse and become helpless before then. A crop failure would be be a certain trigger for the collapse.

I’m sure somewhere there might be some benefit but not for the western US.
Fuck, we are having a solid week of 100–105+ temps plus extreme wildfire danger. I am checking the local fire news every couple hours.
I hate the heat, hate it with a passion and if I could afford to move somewhere where it never got over 80 degrees I’d be gone in a nano second.

If global warming gets worse the entire southwestern US is going to go up in smoke, it already is.

There will be places that benefit from a changing climate and there will be those that suffer; such is the nature of change.

Drilling for oil in the Arctic will be easier.
Russia will get direct access to the Atlantic.

In 50 years real estate in Western NY near the Great Lakes and Finger Lakes will be worth a fortune. It is at higher elevations above sea level. It is surrounded by Lake Ontario and Lake Erie which moderates the temperature and are about 250 ft above sea level so an ocean rise of 20 ft -50 ft will not affect it.
Six 6 months of heating bills will be reduced and more than offset the 2 months of additional air conditioning.
Right now Western NY has the some of the lowest property values in the country. (Not many people want to fight with snow for 4–5 months of the year.)
Get in on the ground floor. :-)

@LuckyGuy I’d happily fight with snow in exchange for not having to fight with 90–105 degree heat 4–5 months out the year anymore. haha
I’d just stock pile supplies and not leave the house for weeks on end.

@ARE_you_kidding_me It’s not a “proven science” part of it is natural and that’s a fact. The human caused part is there too but the relative amount is up for debate.
I thought it was fairly agreed upon that the Earth goes through cycles like these, like the housing market, it will eventually go the other way even if none of us are here to see it; just like at some point the poles are allegedly suppose to flip and north will go south and south pole will go north.

How can anyone claim that the zillions of tons of carbon dioxide we’ve been pouring into our atmosphere for the last 150 years has no effect?

Whenever I see an answer such as yours @Hypocrisy_Central about how Earth goes through cycles I am reminded of the meme that says: “Satan, because without a scapegoat you might have to take personal responsibility for your actions”

@HC the global cycles are scientific fact, it’s all over the geologic record. I can drive down the interstate to a particularly nice cut of strata nearby and prove that to myself. Nobody with any knowledge of geology disputes that at all. Where the debate comes in is if our proven CO2 contribution is having a detrimental effect on climate. Nobody with half a brain thinks we should continue on the same path but where I get cross with the alarmists is when they only see catastrophy, human fault and general doom and gloom. We don’t actually know what our CO2 contribution is doing to climate. We don’t know if it is going to be detrimental or not. Hell, we don’t even understand climate well. Anyone who thinks they really get climate is mistaken and dare I say a little dangerous.

I also feel the point is moot. We have to find alternative sources of energy because fossil fuels are finite. That can not be disputed.

One source.

~ ” Globally – every year we currently consume the equivalent of over 11 billion tonnes of oil in fossil fuels. ” The article reads that at that rate it will be gone by 2052.

I’ll be and gone and a fossil by 2052 too. haha

^^ ”Globally – every year we currently consume the equivalent of over 11 billion tonnes of oil in fossil fuels. ” The article reads that at that rate it will be gone by 2052.
“We are running out, we are running out”, I have heard that since the 60s, and sure enough, BAM! They discover more somewhere, or how to extract it from where they could never before. Man will be off this planet before things run dry.

@Hypocrisy_Central THINK. There have been a finite number of plants and animals since the beginning of life on earth. A finite number. Not an unlimited number. It’s inevitable that we will run out.
You said, “We are running out, we are running out”, I have heard that since the 60s, and sure enough,BAM! They discover more somewhere, or how to extract it from where they could never before.” You overlooked your own point. They RUN OUT in one area (look around at all the old, rusted oil fields, sitting dormant and rotting) and have to go looking for another area. Sure, they can still find them, although it’s getting harder and harder and creating more and more issues.
You and I will be gone by the time it runs out, but that’s far from “all man kind.” Our children and grand children and great grand children will be here.

Do you not care about that?

There are some deep wells that are 5 miles down and 3 miles horizontally. (I still don’t know how they do that!) Do you know why they do that? Because they have to. The easy supply is gone so they have to go after the more difficult stuff. BUT, at some point, the energy required to lift the raw material out of the ground will be more than the energy value of the product – a hydrocarbon black hole.
That would make an interesting physics problem. Assume the raw material is 15% pure, Assume the energy to pump efficiency is 33%. At what depth must the product be located for the energy to lift it to the surface to be equal to the useful energy?