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

We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 264 posts

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#51

Post by codecamper »

shouldbworking wrote: post #30
JshWright wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know much about climate science ... I'm just skeptical that the rising CO2 level is as dangerous as it's made out to be. Respectfully, is this a mindset you apply to other aspects of your life? Let's say you leased an apartment in a large building, and after an inspection, numerous structural engineers said the building was in danger of collapse. Would you say "I don't know much about engineering, but I'm s…

I see your point. To me it's like numerous engineers are warning me that the temperature of the building is going up quickly. When I ask any of them what to do they say we should stop producing heat. I ask whats going to happen when the building gets hotter quickly and get 10 different answers. Somebody tells me the building has been much hotter in the past, but this is the fastest its heated up before. I ask if it's…

Maybe scientists who spend their entire lives studying this stuff know more about it you. Maybe you should listen to them.

Maybe they aren't exact with their knowledge. Maybe even it'll be more out of control than even they are able to forecast.

What then?

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#52

Post by ZenoArrow »

clumsysmurf wrote: post #16
shouldbworking wrote: post #4

I don't know much about climate science, but won't plants multiply and grow faster until we eventually hit a new equilibrium CO2 level? I guess the only danger is reaching thermal runaway before that happens? Then again, earth CO2 levels have been far higher in the past without signs that it killed off much life on Earth. Is rising CO2 that dangerous? Don't humans already have effective ways to reduce surface heating…

CO2 impacts more than plants. For example "Rising CO2 levels reduce protein in crucial pollen source for bees" https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2016/Q2/rising-co2-...

There's also ocean acidification.

http://ocean.si.edu/ocean-acidification

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#53

Post by hyperbovine »

JshWright wrote: post #15
shouldbworking wrote: post #4

I don't know much about climate science, but won't plants multiply and grow faster until we eventually hit a new equilibrium CO2 level? I guess the only danger is reaching thermal runaway before that happens? Then again, earth CO2 levels have been far higher in the past without signs that it killed off much life on Earth. Is rising CO2 that dangerous? Don't humans already have effective ways to reduce surface heating…

> I don't know much about climate science ... I'm just skeptical that the rising CO2 level is as dangerous as it's made out to be. Respectfully, is this a mindset you apply to other aspects of your life? Let's say you leased an apartment in a large building, and after an inspection, numerous structural engineers said the building was in danger of collapse. Would you say "I don't know much about engineering, but I'm s…

I take his point about predictions not factoring in any sort of human mitigation, though. It's pretty obvious to me that inventing ways to fight or even reverse global warming (basically, geoengineering) is going to become the defining scientific and industrial challenge of our (grand-)childrens' era. Think solid-state electronics or genomics but on an entirely larger, more urgent scale. Pretty much the only thing keeping me hopeful these days is that we've scarcely even begun to really try and combat this problem.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#54

Post by codecamper »

ythn wrote: post #21
JshWright wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know much about climate science ... I'm just skeptical that the rising CO2 level is as dangerous as it's made out to be. Respectfully, is this a mindset you apply to other aspects of your life? Let's say you leased an apartment in a large building, and after an inspection, numerous structural engineers said the building was in danger of collapse. Would you say "I don't know much about engineering, but I'm s…

Not quite the same. Climate scientists are notoriously bad at predicting consequences of climate change - kind of like how meteorologists are often bad at predicting the weather. Why is it okay to be skeptical of what meteorologists are predicting, but not okay to be skeptical of what climate scientists are predicting? It's one thing to be skeptical of sciences that have stood the test of time like civil engineering…

You are right. What if the scientists have not predicted the full effects of too much CO2 in the atmosphere? Ever consider that one?

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#56

Post by [deleted] »

acabal wrote: post #42

Does anyone have ideas on how a mid-career software developer can switch gears into the clean energy/climate change industry, to do something to help? I've come to think that climate change will be humanity's defining moment, and that we'll all be suffering greatly come mid-to-late-century. I want to do what I can to put my professional skills to use in helping. But I'm not sure where to even begin.

[deleted]

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#57

Post by codecamper »

shouldbworking wrote: post #13
mikeash wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Increasing CO2 does not necessarily result in more plants. The feedback cycles are complex and there are other limiting factors. Imagine, for example, if the oxygen concentration was increasing instead. Would you expect humans to multiply faster and reach a new equilibrium because of it? Concentrations have indeed been much higher in the deep past. The concern isn't destroying all life, it's damaging or destroying ci…

I read that the era of nuclear testing noticably decreased surface temperatures for some time. If we can't figure anything else out we could probably settle for blowing up a bunch of cleanish lead wrapped nukes out in the ocean every couple months? It sounds terrible but if done right it would have little impact to life on earth

Geez I read this comment & thought... "how can there be so many dumb programmers out there". Then I realized it is just one loud idiot. You talk a lot of garbage.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#58

Post by hyperbovine »

monk_e_boy wrote: post #19
shouldbworking wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that the era of nuclear testing noticably decreased surface temperatures for some time. If we can't figure anything else out we could probably settle for blowing up a bunch of cleanish lead wrapped nukes out in the ocean every couple months? It sounds terrible but if done right it would have little impact to life on earth

"The view that some scientists have that we need to manipulate the planet in order to fix it is another one that bothers me. We need to be wary of false solutions like geoengineering. I’ve just read a paper that outlines plans to pump cold water into the Arctic to try and refreeze the ice-cap. It’s totally mad! This old style of thinking believes the Earth operates like a machine, but that’s not how natural systems o…

Not researching geoengineering is at least as dangerous as attempting it. Geoengineering is definitely going to be attempted--nay, ordered--long before Manhattan, Mumbai, Shanghai, etc. are under a foot of water. Whatever we've managed to figure out, no matter how stupid a solution it might be, is what's going to get tossed at this problem by the same ignorant politicians that got us into this mess. So we might as well make it a good one.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#59

Post by cardamomo »

shouldbworking wrote: post #30
JshWright wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know much about climate science ... I'm just skeptical that the rising CO2 level is as dangerous as it's made out to be. Respectfully, is this a mindset you apply to other aspects of your life? Let's say you leased an apartment in a large building, and after an inspection, numerous structural engineers said the building was in danger of collapse. Would you say "I don't know much about engineering, but I'm s…

I see your point. To me it's like numerous engineers are warning me that the temperature of the building is going up quickly. When I ask any of them what to do they say we should stop producing heat. I ask whats going to happen when the building gets hotter quickly and get 10 different answers. Somebody tells me the building has been much hotter in the past, but this is the fastest its heated up before. I ask if it's…

This is not an apt analogy.

> I ask whats going to happen when the building gets hotter quickly and get 10 different answers.

It shouldn't be surprising that there isn't one clear answer. Earth is a complex system, and it is changing in many ways right now.

> I ask if it's actually even bad that the building is getting hotter quickly and everyone says "Of course it is! It's never heated up this fast before!"

The pace of global warming is indeed a problem, as organisms cannot migrate or adapt fast enough. Forest ecosystems, for example, may not be able to migrate to cooler latitudes or elevations. [1]

> I also wonder why none of the engineers suggested opening the windows instead of producing less heat.

Not an option. Except for the sunlight streaming in, our planet is a closed system. A spaceship[2] may be a better analogy.

[1] http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/09/130915-clima... [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaceship_Earth

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#60

Post by chongli »

JshWright wrote: post #15
shouldbworking wrote: post #4

I don't know much about climate science, but won't plants multiply and grow faster until we eventually hit a new equilibrium CO2 level? I guess the only danger is reaching thermal runaway before that happens? Then again, earth CO2 levels have been far higher in the past without signs that it killed off much life on Earth. Is rising CO2 that dangerous? Don't humans already have effective ways to reduce surface heating…

> I don't know much about climate science ... I'm just skeptical that the rising CO2 level is as dangerous as it's made out to be. Respectfully, is this a mindset you apply to other aspects of your life? Let's say you leased an apartment in a large building, and after an inspection, numerous structural engineers said the building was in danger of collapse. Would you say "I don't know much about engineering, but I'm s…

Let's say you leased an apartment in a large building, and after an inspection, numerous structural engineers said the building was in danger of collapse. Would you say "I don't know much about engineering, but I'm skeptical it's that bad", or would you demand the building management take steps to correct the issues?

I like this analogy because it highlights the wrongheadedness of climate change denial. There is a key difference, however: to get the dangerous apartment building fixed involves a reasonable number of people and a reasonable amount of money, no matter how big or how unsound the building is.

Stopping -- let alone reversing -- climate change is orders of magnitude more difficult than that. It involves the coordination of billions of people in a task that goes against their short-term, individual interest. This is very hard to do [0].

[0] https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/22/repost-the-non-liberta...

Post reply on HN