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

171–180 of 264 posts

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#171

Post by Coincoin »

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…

Plants won't help us, just as cows are not making the problem worse.

It doesn't matter how much plants and algea grow, when they die, they send the carbon back into the atmosphere and ocean. We have to sequestrate the carbon and totally remove it from the ecosystem.

Sequestration is what took millions of years, when major events buried large swabs of living matter in the ground "forever".

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#172

Post by battlebot »

tzs wrote: post #104
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.

If in the US I'd suggest getting politically active. It will take long enough even according to the pessimistic models (assuming we don't hit some doomsday scenario like the clathrate gun) for things to actually get noticeably bad [1] that a lot of people will choose short term profit over long term fixing the climate. That means that to seriously get things done soon is going to require government action, and that m…

I don't think you understand that politically, climate change is just an issue for demagogues to demagogue with. I'm sure communists would happily take over and pass a ton of laws that will limit everyone's freedom and take away what little economic upper mobility they still have in the name of "getting something done." But here's the thing about communism--it's track record on environmental issues is abysmal. Communists were and are the world's worst polluters, from the Soviet Union, to China, Cuba, and everywhere else, dumb commies can't find their asses with both hands a flashlight and take away all ability to debate and discuss matters openly and everything just gets far, far worse.

"Strong government action" is just forcing someone to bend to someone else's will. Apply enough force and those being coerced will fight back, violently, if necessary.

It's not like people such as Al Gore are anything more than criminals making away with boatloads of money.

This is how I have viewed political environmentalism in ALL its forms--it is a dodge, a con, away to make tons of money will appearing to "care." People like Gore are the Goldman Sachs of caring about the environment to make money. There are no political solutions for this problem.

That leaves technology. If anything is going to solve our problems, it is us humans inventing our way out of them. That's it. Evolve the technology or die.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#173

Post by omegaworks »

alphapapa wrote: post #169
losteric wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a strategic regulation that replaces multiple tactical regulations. Therefore, carbon tax leads to fewer regulations.

Which regulations does it replace?

Cap and trade, in California, at least. https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2017/03/02/californ...

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#174

Post by JshWright »

pfarnsworth wrote: post #153
codecamper wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You mean like the scientists and doctors who for DECADES claimed a diet low in fat was "heart healthy" and diets high in saturated fats and cholesterol would lead to heart disease, only for that to be rescinded in the last few years?

There are interesting parallels between oil companies meddling in climate science and certain food industries (particularly soda companies) doing the same thing in nutrition science.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#175

Post by JshWright »

interfixus wrote: post #95
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…

Respectfully, do you know more about climate science than shouldbworking ?

Did I claim that anywhere?

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#176

Post by Turing_Machine »

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…

One thing that is universally ignored in this type of hysteria-promoting article is that all of the carbon in fossil fuels used to be in the atmosphere. Every atom of it. That's why they're called "fossil fuels".

Guess what? The earth was just fine.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#177

Post by Turing_Machine »

codecamper wrote: post #38
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…

Agreed. It's time to get very very excited here. Well if you only care about yourself, then screw it. If you have an ounce of care for the next generation or the ecosystems of the Earth, then it's time to start doing everything possible to replace our power generation with renewables (solar & wind) and our cars with electric cars. It won't cost all that much. Not doing it will cost a whole heck of a lot more.

"It won't cost all that much."

You aren't a starving peasant in Bangladesh, dude.

Reducing energy consumption to any significant degree will doom millions of people to an unpleasant death.

And no, solar and wind won't do it. At least not earth-based solar. Space-based solar might do the trick, but the risks and costs would be extremely high.

There is exactly one feasible alternative to fossil fuels, and that is nuclear.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#178

Post by Turing_Machine »

EGreg wrote: post #161

Show this to any conservative who claims that global warming has nothing to do with human activity. I guess it's just a giant coincidence that we live in the time of the highest CO2 concentration in millions of years? And the highest disappearance of species?

"Millions of years" is an eyeblink in the history of the earth. In fact, the CO2 level has been much higher than this level in the past (like, orders of magnitude higher). The earth was fine.

And no, this isn't the era of the "highest disappearance of species". Not even close.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#179

Post by mtempm »

alphapapa wrote: post #140
btdiehr wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me get this straight, you're saying that people should purposefully mislead the public?

It's actual scientists saying this. > On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but — which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which…

That is specifically a scientist that got heavily involved in the climate change movement. Not every scientist would agree with those methods.

Re: We Just Breached the 410 PPM Threshold for CO2

#180

Post by yongjik »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #177
codecamper wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. It's time to get very very excited here. Well if you only care about yourself, then screw it. If you have an ounce of care for the next generation or the ecosystems of the Earth, then it's time to start doing everything possible to replace our power generation with renewables (solar & wind) and our cars with electric cars. It won't cost all that much. Not doing it will cost a whole heck of a lot more.

"It won't cost all that much." You aren't a starving peasant in Bangladesh, dude. Reducing energy consumption to any significant degree will doom millions of people to an unpleasant death. And no, solar and wind won't do it. At least not earth-based solar. Space-based solar might do the trick, but the risks and costs would be extremely high. There is exactly one feasible alternative to fossil fuels, and that is nucle…

You don't get to say "The Earth will be fine" in one thread and then commiserate with a Bangladeshi peasant in another thread just because you find it convenient.

Choose your pick.

Post reply on HN