Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 315 posts

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#301

Post by [deleted] »

gjm11 wrote: post #279
_red wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the vast majority of the earths history there has been no ice at the poles. We are coming out of an ice-age currently which is why there are still some remnants left.

> the vast majority of the earth's history For the great majority of the earth's history there were no humans either, but I personally would be upset at the prospect of that situation recurring. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_ice_sheet seems to indicate that there has been a south polar ice cap for tens of millions of years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_ecology_and_his... suggests that there'…

[deleted]

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#302

Post by tr1ck5t3r »

gjm11 wrote: post #227
tr1ck5t3r wrote: post #224

Its nice picking your time scales and models to convey a message as this image shows when CO2 was in the thousands parts per million. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/76/Phaneroz... Now whilst its true the sun is heating up before it goes super nova millions of years in the future, which is what alot of the global warming fear is based on, and yes man has contributed a small % of CO2 by releasing CO2…

> Its nice picking your time scales and models to convey a message Yeah, they're totally cherry-picking by only looking at the last four million years . Shocking. You're right that if we go back, say, 100 million years, we find CO2 levels somewhat higher than today. Other things we find: temperatures 20-40 degrees C higher at the poles than today; something like half of Europe and the US under water. (See http://www.…

Picture says a thousand words. http://static1.squarespace.com/static/56530521e4b0c307d59bbe...

I get the impression that because you have not heard of this you deny it?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p005xgcj "As the Sun ages, it will gradually become a red giant as its hydrogen fuel begins to run out. Its surface will expand to approximately 100 times its current size as its core shrinks, and the inner Solar System will be engulfed."

>So far as I know, there is no reason to think that solar minima cause volcanic activity

Apart from the fact volcanic activity stepped up during the last event.

>Whose estimates?

Read the book by Professor Fagan. Its a long read but worth it.

>It looks very much as if you do. Far from it, unless you believe in not informing the public.

The IPCC were hacked and exposed.

Worth understanding Milgram's obedience to authority. Just whose data do you trust?

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#303

Post by wallace_f »

mikeash wrote: post #298
wallace_f wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can never understand why dumping pollution into the atmosphere and making other people bear the costs is categorized under "capitalism" and "free market," while making people actually pay for the costs they impose on others through pollution is considered "redistribution" and "communism." Your confusion is well founded. It is actually the other way around. Privatizing externalities (the environmental costs) is ho…

That seems quite sensible, but unfortunately every time something is brought up, people come out of the woodwork to criticize it on the basis that it's anti-capitalist, destroys free markets, etc.

It is unfortunate, I agree.

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#304

Post by gjm11 »

tr1ck5t3r wrote: post #302
gjm11 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its nice picking your time scales and models to convey a message Yeah, they're totally cherry-picking by only looking at the last four million years . Shocking. You're right that if we go back, say, 100 million years, we find CO2 levels somewhat higher than today. Other things we find: temperatures 20-40 degrees C higher at the poles than today; something like half of Europe and the US under water. (See http://www.…

Picture says a thousand words. http://static1.squarespace.com/static/56530521e4b0c307d59bbe... I get the impression that because you have not heard of this you deny it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p005xgcj "As the Sun ages, it will gradually become a red giant as its hydrogen fuel begins to run out. Its surface will expand to approximately 100 times its current size as its core shrinks, and the inner Solar System…

> Picture says a thousand words

It might have been better if you'd supplied some of those words, because that picture doesn't appear to me to indicate anything on the way as major as the Dalton, let alone the Maunder, minimum.

> As the Sun ages [...]

Yeah, oddly enough that isn't what I was questioning. You made two claims that are just flatly wrong. (1) That the sun is going to go supernova. Nope, not happening. Wrong sort of star. (2) That increases in the sun's temperature on its way to this alleged supernova are "what alot of the global warming fear is based on". The sun's temperature and luminosity aren't going to change appreciably on a timescale shorter than many million years.

> The IPCC were hacked and exposed.

What?

(Are you mixing up the IPCC with the UEA CRU? The two are entirely different, and the hacks didn't "expose" anything to speak of.)

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#305

Post by Teever »

effingwewt wrote: post #217
ensiferum wrote: post #215

I walk to work. Now are you part of the solution or part of the problem?

Yea, not everyone has that luxury. If you said something along the lines of "I've been contacting my state representative to push for more reform, donating to 'X' to aid in public awareness, etc", I would have given you the pat on the back you so obviously crave. And what about recycling, or purchasing avenues which ensure re-population? Plenty we can all do other than the current popular hipster "in" thing.

It is very astounding to hear someone describe walking to work as a luxury.

I don't know what that says about our society.

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#306

Post by opo »

ObeyTheGuts wrote: post #221
opo wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...Energy storage is possible. Possible, but except for pumped hydro, it looks like still a lot of work needs to be done. >...3) Fusion is attainable in the time frame we need it in, if we increase research funding, but its not required. That said if we cracked fusion, we would have all the energy we would need to desalinate seawater and sequester carbon. I am not sure if fusion is attainable in the time frame neede…

Breeder reactors like fast neutron reactor main advantage is less radioactive waste, there is enough of uranium in world to feed the old light water reactors for thousands of years too, but they produce lot of radioactive waste which could be used as fuel and inactivated in breeder reactors.

>Breeder reactors like fast neutron reactor main advantage is less radioactive waste,

Generally they will also have more passive safety features and in the case of something like the IFR, an even smaller chance of proliferation. Less nuclear waste might be the most important issue to most people though.

>... there is enough of uranium in world to feed the old light water reactors for thousands of years too

True, looks like I was really using the wrong units of time. Scientific American had an article where they estimated a 60,000 year supply at current rates. If we switched to the world using breeder reactors, probably more like hundreds of thousands or millions of years of fuel depending on the growth rate you use for consumption.

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#307

Post by losteric »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #296
blondie9x wrote: post #241

We all know by now CO2 and CH4 leads to a warmer planet. We also know what's driving greenhouse gas levels to rise across Earth. Contributors are deforestation, intensive animal farming, and primarily the combustion of carbon fossil fuels like coal, tar sands, oil, natural gas etc. But here is the underlying problem, despite us knowing how bad things are, (97+% of scientists who study this field agree we are causing…

> If we do not rally against it, our ability to live on this planet is at stake. I think you're speculating here, we don't actually know this. I believe the primary reason we haven't done anything yet is because the effects of increased CO2 levels haven't yet reached the scale of mass food production shortages, or a sudden increase the price of basic food stuffs. And since we can't know whether that will ever happen,…

Civilization's biggest challenge is addressing multi-generational problems. Modern America is one of the most depressing and backwards nations in that regard... we struggle with small engineering projects that simply span a couple decades, to say nothing of investing in and protecting future generations.

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#308

Post by Oletros »

tr1ck5t3r wrote: post #302
gjm11 wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its nice picking your time scales and models to convey a message Yeah, they're totally cherry-picking by only looking at the last four million years . Shocking. You're right that if we go back, say, 100 million years, we find CO2 levels somewhat higher than today. Other things we find: temperatures 20-40 degrees C higher at the poles than today; something like half of Europe and the US under water. (See http://www.…

Picture says a thousand words. http://static1.squarespace.com/static/56530521e4b0c307d59bbe... I get the impression that because you have not heard of this you deny it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p005xgcj "As the Sun ages, it will gradually become a red giant as its hydrogen fuel begins to run out. Its surface will expand to approximately 100 times its current size as its core shrinks, and the inner Solar System…

> Picture says a thousand words.

And what we suppose to see in that picture?

> "As the Sun ages, it will gradually become a red giant as its hydrogen fuel begins to run out. Its surface will expand to approximately 100 times its current size as its core shrinks, and the inner Solar System will be engulfed."

Apart that the Sun won't become a supernova, are you aware of the timeframe involved?

It will happen in 5 BILLION years. If you say that global warming alarmism is related to that you're very disillusional.

> Apart from the fact volcanic activity stepped up during the last event.

Correlation is not causation. If you're so sure, you can provide any paper studying it.

> Read the book by Professor Fagan. Its a long read but worth it.

So, no single source, you're made it up.

> The IPCC were hacked and exposed.

Do you really know anything about what you talk? Apart that the IPCC has never been hacked, the ones hacked were the University of East Anglia and nothing was exposed.

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#309

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

graeme wrote: post #297
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we do not rally against it, our ability to live on this planet is at stake. I think you're speculating here, we don't actually know this. I believe the primary reason we haven't done anything yet is because the effects of increased CO2 levels haven't yet reached the scale of mass food production shortages, or a sudden increase the price of basic food stuffs. And since we can't know whether that will ever happen,…

Your fifth paragraph (the personal note) is atrocious reasoning. It's the equivalent of saying "There won't be a housing crash. People have warned about that for years, but each year home prices keep rising." The effects of the carbon we're releasing vastly exceed human lifespans. So you have to be prepared for the possibility that predictions will take decades to have a visible impact. The counter to your "we produc…

Yes, I agree it is atrocious reasoning. It's probably not reasoning at all in the sense of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way. I don't care because I'm emotionally exhausted by the situation.

While I do think we should do something, it's not clear to me what I should do other than occasionally shout at the screen from my chair. I suppose I could vote Green or vote with my dollar, if I thought it would help. I could put solar panels on my roof, but I'm not a home owner so I can't. I could buy an electric car but I don't have tens of thousands of spare cash, nor the desire for a vehicle loan, because I'm trying to save for the deposit on a house.

Maybe what I can do is seek solace in the knowledge that future generations will be able to look back and read that I was at least angered for a brief period by the circumstances I find myself in.

And in the mean time I'm going to continue doing the things I like that make living worthwhile, which means driving 200+ kilometres one or twice a month to get to the surf or the mountains in my not-so-fuel-efficient camper van, and having the occasional steak.

But that's just it isn't it, if 'saving the world' means giving up the things I like, I'm not interested, really, until there is zero friction and everyone else is doing it.

And this is the revealed preference of almost all of us on this planet: we're too busy surviving, or too busy enjoying, to stop for a moment and think "should we be doing these things, no? okay let's change". And even when we acknowledge we should change, we don't. We're trying, but it's mostly token gestures.

All the evidence suggests that dead people, previous generations, don't care much about the environment, and since the consequences / benefits to inaction / action are multiple decades out it is very hard for us to act now.

I don't believe we, the global community, will act until our ability to survive is in immediate danger.

Re: Antarctic CO2 Hit 400 PPM for First Time in 4M Years

#310

Post by graeme »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #309
graeme wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your fifth paragraph (the personal note) is atrocious reasoning. It's the equivalent of saying "There won't be a housing crash. People have warned about that for years, but each year home prices keep rising." The effects of the carbon we're releasing vastly exceed human lifespans. So you have to be prepared for the possibility that predictions will take decades to have a visible impact. The counter to your "we produc…

Yes, I agree it is atrocious reasoning. It's probably not reasoning at all in the sense of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way . I don't care because I'm emotionally exhausted by the situation. While I do think we should do something , it's not clear to me what I should do other than occasionally shout at the screen from my chair. I suppose I could vote Green or vote with my dollar, if I thought it wo…

Oh, actually I agree with you then. I don't think we'll do anything unless immediately threatened. If then.

Our CO2 emissions have actually been growing. And any sort of gas/carbon tax that would actually alter behaviour is shouted down.

And when we actually have immediate problems from warming, there will probably be pressure to focus on the short term aspects, such as famines or economic decline, and pressure to keep burning fossils fuels.

Probably the only way out is to have some tech that makes t economically stupid to burn fossil fuels, because they're more expensive.

Post reply on HN