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

The Uninhabitable Earth

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 252 posts

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#181

Post by verylittlemeat »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #68

A few observations: Trying to scare people into behavior does not work very well. The Catholic Church spent centuries threatening people with eternal hell if they had extra-marital sex, and people still had extra-marital sex. Studies have shown that abstinence only sex education results in more teen pregnancies. Thomas Malthus saw an impending famine and begged people to have fewer children. People did not listen. Wh…

To me it is the difference between actually finding a solution and deciding that failure to fix X is a moral failing.

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#182

Post by undersuit »

scottLobster wrote: post #111
chiefofgxbxl wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I'm so concerned about the trend that SUV sales are outpacing Sedan sales. Whereas sedans used to be the "default" car a decade ago, SUVs are now taking their place [0]. All things being equal, a smaller car (sedan) should get better MPG than a larger car (SUV) [1]. And yet it seems that people's efforts to reduce their environmental footprint is focused on recycling a plastic cup here and there [2]. A ve…

Granted some people buy gratuitously large vehicles, but for many there is a practical purpose: moving large amounts of stuff. Whether it's multiple bags of mulch, dorm room furniture, sports equipment, more than 3 kids, or just lots of luggage for a family road trip, there's definitely an advantage to a big car there. Not to mention better performance in snow depending on model. In any case, one we get non-luxury el…

>multiple bags of mulch, dorm room furniture, sports equipment, more than 3 kids, or just lots of luggage for a family road trip

How are these practical purposes? The mulch can stay on the lawn or you could compost it at home; moving dorm room furniture twice a year for 2-4 years does not justify a large vehicle; sports equipment sounds like an attempt to justify a few trips each year into the mountains for a trip to a Ski resort; kids make sense I feel sorry for my parents when I was a child with two siblings stuffed into a 1993 Kia Sephia during road trips, but you could also just not have kids, this is a discussion on ways to reduce climate changes effects and drivers not increase them; and if you have an occasional need for lots of luggage you can do what my parents did for the Kia and put a travel box on top.

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#183

Post by sgt101 »

thesmallestcat wrote: post #119
gilbetron wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: "Pollyannaish plant physiologists will point out that the cereal-crop math applies only to those regions already at peak growing temperature, and they are right — theoretically, a warmer climate will make it easier to grow corn in Greenland. But as the pathbreaking work by Rosamond Naylor and David Battisti has shown, the tropics are already too hot to efficiently grow grain, and those places where…

In the very long term, how can you dispute the benefit of human expansion in Antarctica? Humans have thrived in times when there was little glaciation and suffered in times of increased glaciation. The only benefit of glaciers is that we're accustomed to the climate they promote. I have no doubt that mankind could adjust to and thrive in a world without glaciers. It's ridiculous how afraid humans are to engineer thei…

I think Antarctica is 1/2 the size of North America. You have a house of 400m^2, I present you with a house of 100m^2 and invite you to consider the upside.

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#184

Post by gasbag »

sluggg wrote: post #121

The article worked... I am alarmed. Is there anything I can do with software that would make a difference? Currently, the only things that are coming to mind are simple carbon footprint calculators or infographics/visualization of data, which imo would not be that impactful. I would love to hear ideas

Bret Victor has a page on his site about this.[0] The first hit when I searched for "visualization" was:

"The core technologies in energy storage tend to be physics-based, but software plays essential roles in the form of design tools, simulation tools, and control systems. My favorite example is the inexplicably gorgeous Materials Project, a database and visualization tool for material properties, funded by the Department of Energy’s Vehicle Technologies Program to help invent better batteries."

It's a lengthy page with lots of good ideas, and seeds that might germinate more ideas of your own.

[0]http://worrydream.com/ClimateChange/

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#185

Post by yogthos »

dota_fanatic wrote: post #21
latch wrote: post #15

It's pretty hopeless. I used to think we'd adjust in time, but that was when the decline looked more linear (or at least I thought it looked more linear). Of the many people who I know who are seriously concerned re climate change, I'd say 2 have taken truly meaningful steps . It's not the handful of climate change deniers that's the problem. It's the overwhelming number of people who want to say they're green, but s…

What kind of drastic change should one take? Not having kids, OK, drastic but doable. Cutting out meat, driving less, etc, OK. But what about the rest of the production chain that assumes you're the same as everyone else (whom continues to use and depend on that production chain), which is an ocean of waste compared to what any single person can do? We can individually push the needle very slightly, but it does nothi…

One drastic change would be to abandon capitalism and the idea of growth. Instead, we should be focusing on sustainability which is completely at odds with capitalism.

We need to start making products that are designed to last a long time as opposed to them having been built for planned obsolescence. We need to start abandoning throw away things like plastic containers. For example, Coca-Cola produces a staggering 100 billion disposalbe plastic bottles http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/coca-cola-pl... a year. We have to start moving heavy industry off fossils. We have to move away from combustion engines, and need to abandon cars in general.

The reality of the situation is that most contribution to climate change comes from industrial sources and not individuals.

A 100 companies are responsible for over 70% of all emissions. That's what would need to change, and that's just not going to happen in time. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10...

What's going to happen is that majority of humanity will simply die off. If enough humans are left alive to carry on civilization, hopefully they will have learned something from that.

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#186

Post by antisthenes »

paulpauper wrote: post #29
ancarda wrote: post #3

It sounds very grim, is there any chance/hope of us getting out of this situation or is it just beyond any action at this point? I get the feeling from the article we're doomed.

If it is any solace, people have been predicting he end of the world for a very long time; all predictions thus far have failed.

The just as irrelevant counterpoint to your statement being: an end of the world prediction only has to be right once.

Luckily, most of us can deal with abstractions enough to understand that life is not FFF or 000.

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#187

Post by golergka »

mac01021 wrote: post #142
golergka wrote: post #80

Why is a world war, swiftly reducing populations and industrial output, is never considered among the solutions? While horrifying, it is still better than total extinction.

It's not better than total extinction for those who die in the war. Also, how do you know it is never considered among the solutions?

> It's not better than total extinction for those who die in the war.

But it's better totally.

> Also, how do you know it is never considered among the solutions?

Never seen it discussed.

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#188

Post by sluggg »

gasbag wrote: post #184
sluggg wrote: post #121

The article worked... I am alarmed. Is there anything I can do with software that would make a difference? Currently, the only things that are coming to mind are simple carbon footprint calculators or infographics/visualization of data, which imo would not be that impactful. I would love to hear ideas

Bret Victor has a page on his site about this.[0] The first hit when I searched for "visualization" was: "The core technologies in energy storage tend to be physics-based, but software plays essential roles in the form of design tools, simulation tools, and control systems. My favorite example is the inexplicably gorgeous Materials Project, a database and visualization tool for material properties, funded by the Depa…

I will give it a read, thanks so much!

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#189

Post by kafkaesq »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #68

A few observations: Trying to scare people into behavior does not work very well. The Catholic Church spent centuries threatening people with eternal hell if they had extra-marital sex, and people still had extra-marital sex. Studies have shown that abstinence only sex education results in more teen pregnancies. Thomas Malthus saw an impending famine and begged people to have fewer children. People did not listen. Wh…

Trying to scare people into behavior does not work very well.

What works is "magic science."

Are these the only two options? What about education, radical changes in awareness (and self-awareness), a move toward genuine sense of responsibility toward others as well as to the commons -- is all of that, off the table?

And what if "magic science" fails us this time? Or is that "unthinkable"?

Re: The Uninhabitable Earth

#190

Post by thesmallestcat »

sgt101 wrote: post #183
thesmallestcat wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the very long term, how can you dispute the benefit of human expansion in Antarctica? Humans have thrived in times when there was little glaciation and suffered in times of increased glaciation. The only benefit of glaciers is that we're accustomed to the climate they promote. I have no doubt that mankind could adjust to and thrive in a world without glaciers. It's ridiculous how afraid humans are to engineer thei…

I think Antarctica is 1/2 the size of North America. You have a house of 400m^2, I present you with a house of 100m^2 and invite you to consider the upside.

It's not a trade though, especially with most/all of Canada and Alaska becoming livable. Not to mention unrelated benefits. like year-round arctic navigation and safer navigation around Antarctica
Post reply on HN