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

121–130 of 264 posts

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#121

Post by Dahoramano »

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…

erratic and extreme weather patterns is going to be catastrophic for all plant life. we're fucked if we don't do something about this.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#122

Post by embersdev »

davidp wrote: post #74
JshWright wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're stretching the analogy a bit too far there... We know that increasing atmospheric levels of CO2 will result in higher temperatures (the mechanism is well understood, and the IPCC models have done a good job of predicting that over the past couple decades), we also know rising temperatures will result in rising sea levels (again, we have empirically observed this happening at rates consistent with our u…

Strategy tip: Don't tell him to know his place and listen to the enlightened; send him the next set of links that will satisfy and maybe further stimulate his curiosity. Without those links, your last paragraph is really a statement about your own approach to the problem, with a little condescension thrown in for his failure to follow the same pattern. It's counterproductive to your own goal of persuasion. In any sci…

This is probably the best advice I have ever seen on this topic.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#123

Post by epistasis »

gooserock wrote: post #109
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.

> 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 It's easy. - Stop flying. - Eat less meat. - Buy less stuff. - Use less energy.

This is not a personal responsibility problem, it's a societal priority problem.

Living "virtuously" only changes your own impact. We need to change impact globally.

We need to make jets that run on biofuels or synthetic fuels. We need to change our energy systems to be carbon neutral. We need to help the developing start using carbon neutral technologies directly, without going through a fossil fuel phase.

These are the things that will stop climate change. Changing one's own impact does very little.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#124

Post by crush-n-spread »

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.

Hello, please read up on Advanced Silicate Weathering, it is a feasible carbon sequestration technique. It is probably the best option that we have to get the carbon cycle back under control.

http://www.greensand.nl/content/user/1/files/rog20004.pdf

The idea is you crush and spread silicate rock dust, it produces cations and goes into the ocean, and then reacts with and absorbs carbon from the atmosphere to produce a carbonate mineral that fertilizes ocean life and de-acidifies the oceans.

Requires crushing hundreds of cubic km of rock per year, and spreading the product in damp jungle climates and coastlines.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#125

Post by danjoc »

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'm just skeptical that the rising CO2 level is as dangerous as it's made out to be.

You are not alone,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gDErDwXqhc

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#126

Post by tossaway322 »

gjm11 wrote: post #12

This is very bad (albeit completely unsurprising) news, but I really don't see that the word "threshold" is appropriate. Is there some special bad thing that happens once 410ppm is reached, that's qualitatively different from 400ppm? Nope. The article itself is quite clear about this: e.g., it quotes one climate scientist as saying "These milestones are just numbers, but they give us an opportunity to pause and take…

gjm11 says: "Is there some special bad thing that happens once 410ppm is reached, that's qualitatively different from 400ppm?"

Yes. Climate change proponents post articles such as the OP here and then cry "The sky is falling, the sky is falling and I can prove it! We're at the 410 PPM Threshold, just as we predicted!"

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#127

Post by nonbel »

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

These geoengineering ideas sound more dangerous every time I read them... At some point, if it hasn't happened already, this is going to become a dangerous cult that threatens our species.

You really believe this? We should blow up nuclear bombs in the ocean every few months to avoid a possible temperature rise an order of magnitude smaller than experienced during the yearly cycle.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#128

Post by mitchty »

cardamomo wrote: post #84
semi-extrinsic wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not an option. Actually, it is an option. Either we can take CO2 out of the atmosphere and put it back underground where it came from; or we could start doing climate engineering to increase the reflectivity of Earth (less sunlight in), using water vapor clouds at low altitude or aerosols at high altitude; or we could put up a big shade in space between us and the sun. Are those expensive and difficult things? Defi…

I guess I was thinking more literally: the Earth does not have large windows we can use to exchange air with the outside environment. Carbon sequestration doesn't remove CO2 from our "spaceship," though it may help.

Why would you want to completely remove CO2 from the earth and not sequester it? There is a bunch of useful carbon and oxygen in it that you can at least leave for future humans to use if its sequestered.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#129

Post by robbiemitchell »

ams6110 wrote: post #94
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.

You might want to work on a way to make a convincing argument to the general public. Because the echo chamber here notwithstanding, where I live nobody really believes there is a climate problem, or at best they give it lip service while they drive their new Escalade to Starbucks for a $5 cup of coffee. I think that in reality we will not see people changing behaviors unless and until there are real observable climat…

For the Conservative crowd, we need to characterize renewable energy as energy independence.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#130

Post by crush-n-spread »

This post is intended for folks upset and concerned about the state of the climate, that are unsure about how to make an impact, but are very interested in doing something; it does not directly discuss the article (sorry dang.)

First off, I suggest you disregard politics and convincing your friends: Telling the ignorant masses to change their firmly held opinions and way of life is a waste of time. Do not delude yourself into thinking you'll get 5 billion poor folks (there are about that many) to not use coal power, or to not get gas scooters/cars. They will all do it - unless we provide a better alternatives. So your first action is to help make electric cars, solar power generation, and batteries as good as possible, and that means you go work hard as an engineer at one of these companies. Not an elec/mech/whatever engineer? Stop thinking so small; you have the internet, teach yourself enough to do a thesis level project and start applying. You can do this.

The second, more dire action is to help with Carbon Sequestration (taking carbon out of the atmosphere). What you need to do is replicate the Elon Musk model of directing the Human Colossus [0] towards Accelerated Silicate Weathering [1] - That is, crushing and spreading silicate minerals along all coastlines and wet tropical climates. There are two links; the first covers how Elon Musk uses commercially viable businesses to fund research and advanced engineering to create leverage. The second link covers the science behind accelerated weathering; The abstract is that the oceans naturally uptake carbon from the atmosphere by reacting C02 with cations in the water that come from dissolved silicate minerals. This uptake de-acidifies the oceans and produces food for ocean life; for us to collect all the carbon produced in the USA last year, we would need to crush about 60km^3 of silicate rock (which is in abundance) and spread it along coastlines.

To successful sequester enough carbon to save the ecosystem, this might one of the best options we have.

The way you go about this is you copy Elon's model and make a business crushing rock. Thus, you must make mining machines and get into the mining business. Take a software based approach and use electric vehicles if you can. Vertically integrate, hire more engineers, get more clients and build a lot of machines. I think that's a good starting point.

Anyways, I've thought a lot about this and if you are concerned then these are the two things you ought to focus on. Don't try and convince people! We need engineering solutions not talk.

[1]http://waitbutwhy.com/2017/04/neuralink.html [2]http://www.greensand.nl/content/user/1/files/rog20004.pdf

Post reply on HN