Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lots of Europeans, Chinese, Japanese, etc opting for zero already.
The problem lies in developing nations.
They release drastically less CO2 than the richer people do.
Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
151–160 of 315 posts
Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#152I've been having a bit of an existential crisis about this recently. Is sustainability even possible anymore? We are obviously living beyond the capacity of the earth to cope right now. But is it even possible to sustain this many people (at current standards of living with foreseeable technology)?
I believe in global warming, but I also think a higher or lower temperature Earth with a greater level of CO2 just means that different organisms will thrive. We think that we have damaged the Earth, but the Earth is much, much older than us, and we've barely made a dent if you consider the full lifetime of everything that ever will be. Now- if we had started a global thermonuclear war and eradicated all life on Eart…
> different organisms will thrive
Like mosquitos, ticks and other disease-carrying insects that kill 1 million humans every year.
Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#153Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe in global warming, but I also think a higher or lower temperature Earth with a greater level of CO2 just means that different organisms will thrive. We think that we have damaged the Earth, but the Earth is much, much older than us, and we've barely made a dent if you consider the full lifetime of everything that ever will be. Now- if we had started a global thermonuclear war and eradicated all life on Eart…
That's my way of thinking about it too. At any rate getting nearly 200 independent nation states to agree on anything when they all individually benefit by flouting the rules - that's madness. We'll burn oil and coal and gas until it doesn't make economic sense. I very much doubt politics will change the outcome. Technology will hopefully save us from ourselves on that front. A bigger problem is positive feedback loo…
A bigger problem is positive feedback loops.
Historically we've had much more CO2 in the atmosphere than we do now. Why didn't the methane bubble up and kill everything then?
Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#155I've been having a bit of an existential crisis about this recently. Is sustainability even possible anymore? We are obviously living beyond the capacity of the earth to cope right now. But is it even possible to sustain this many people (at current standards of living with foreseeable technology)?
I would suggest you stop worrying and get on with your biological imperative to reproduce your dna, only in slightly variated pattern to ensure parasites and viruses are kept guessing.
Also know that people have been grappling with this question for centuries and every doomsday prediction has turned out to be wrong. So there is cause for optimism.
Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#156I've been having a bit of an existential crisis about this recently. Is sustainability even possible anymore? We are obviously living beyond the capacity of the earth to cope right now. But is it even possible to sustain this many people (at current standards of living with foreseeable technology)?
Not having kids may be one of the biggest forms of environmental activism.
Your whole reason for being, the thing that gets you out of bed and searching for food, is your in-built desire to recreate and nurture life. Intentionally rejecting that is a massive commitment to make, given the very long term consequences of it.
In short, go have some kids, bring them up well and enjoy the benefits. Our biology is tribe-based and ingrained, so it's smart to work with that and be part of a tribe.
We all die alone, but those that die surrounded by love feel less lonely in all the decades up to that final point. That's your Dna rewarding you for a job well done.
Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
Artificial trees are not considered geoengineering since they are just reversing the CO2 released. The really sad aspect is we are not putting in the R&D resources needed to develop them to the required scale. No matter what we do about preventing the release of more CO2, we need to deal with the CO2 that has already been released.
Regular trees work quite well and are cheaper. You just have to harvest them and not burn the wood, or turn it to biochar.
There are not enough natural trees to do the job because we have taken most of the really productive land to grow food. While there is some potential to use biochar in some locations, it is not going to be enough to get the CO2 levels down at the pace we need.
Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#158Forgive my ignorance on this issue but Earth has various feedback mechanisms that forestalls CO2: getting absorbed back into rocks and consumption by flora. Is comparing CO2 levels to 4 mya disingenuous because that is just one variable we are isolating? Are we sure that rising CO2 is producing these effects attributed to climate change and not some complicated combination of factors that is evidenced by Earth histor…
No, you're not ignorant.
Yes, if the earth were an unstable system it would have destabilised in the past.
Yes, it is a combination of factors poorly understood, like the work only now coming out of CERN.
Yes, the ROI of the various treaties and tax plans are beyond negative.
Yes, this type of comment is verboten.
Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#159Go ahead and call me all the usual names (I don't care), but I'm a skeptic of a few things - especially things like science that has strong political influences/biases/implications - and yes, sometimes even mainstream science. But no, I don't deny or ignore the apparent trends. That's why I also don't feel (as others have expressed here) any sense of grave alarmism or fear about the effects of warming. When climate-r…
Rich countries with efficient and abundant energy have the lowest population growth rates and the cleanest and best preserved environments.
The solution for environment degradation is the same as for poverty - the two are obviously linked.
The solution is efficient energy and rejection of superstitious nonsense.
Alas the majority of the world is trying to unwind the first and positively going the other way on the second.
Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years
#160I've been having a bit of an existential crisis about this recently. Is sustainability even possible anymore? We are obviously living beyond the capacity of the earth to cope right now. But is it even possible to sustain this many people (at current standards of living with foreseeable technology)?
Quite probably not, though the fundamental problem's been apparent since the late 18th century. No, not a typo.
Fossil fuels, population, pollution, mineral resources, topsoil, water. There are numerous problems.
You might want to look up the WorldWatch Institute who have done a lot of basic work here. Pick up a standard ecology text (say, Odum), and you'll find this discussed.
Figuring out how to run fast and hot for a long time is difficult.