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

Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 225 posts

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#21

Post by nhangen »

fredley wrote: post #4
lucidguppy wrote: post #3

1) Go watch the movie cowspiracy on netflix. Go vegan. 2) Get an energy audit and see if your home needs more insulation. If a solar panel installation will pay for itself in a reasonable time where you live (rebates - SRECs - etc) consider getting one. 3) If you live in a warmer climate with safe biking paths - get an electric bike to go to work. 4) The next car you get should be electric or plugin hybrid. Even if i…

Even if you don't want to go vegan, it's easy to eat less meat (and probably good for your health if you have a Western diet). My partner is vegetarian, I eat meat occasionally (and when I do I eat good meat, ethically and sustainably farmed). Reducing meat consumption is by far the easiest way to reduce your carbon footprint.

Hate to break it to you, but there is no such thing as ethically farmed meat. If it’s killed for your plate, it’s still bad karma.

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#22

Post by gambiting »

cft wrote: post #10

Nuclear war can reverse global warming [1]. Some argue that since nuclear weapons exist, they will likely be used sooner or later. 1. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110223-nucl...

I thought it was almost decided recently(definitely later than 2011) that actually, nuclear war wouldn't cause global cooldown, or if it did it would be extremely temporary, definitely not on the scale of decades or centuries.

Another interesting fact is that we have detonated nearly 2500 nukes since we first made them, and it had observably zero impact on climate, despite each one releasing gigantic amounts of energy into the atmosphere.

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#23

Post by gambiting »

commenter1 wrote: post #13
lucidguppy wrote: post #3

1) Go watch the movie cowspiracy on netflix. Go vegan. 2) Get an energy audit and see if your home needs more insulation. If a solar panel installation will pay for itself in a reasonable time where you live (rebates - SRECs - etc) consider getting one. 3) If you live in a warmer climate with safe biking paths - get an electric bike to go to work. 4) The next car you get should be electric or plugin hybrid. Even if i…

How about travel by plane? Are you willing to do that?

And then - how about not having children? An impact of a single child is greater than lifetime of eating meat by a single person.

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#24

Post by DennisP »

lucidguppy wrote: post #3

1) Go watch the movie cowspiracy on netflix. Go vegan. 2) Get an energy audit and see if your home needs more insulation. If a solar panel installation will pay for itself in a reasonable time where you live (rebates - SRECs - etc) consider getting one. 3) If you live in a warmer climate with safe biking paths - get an electric bike to go to work. 4) The next car you get should be electric or plugin hybrid. Even if i…

I do that stuff but it's not going to save the world.

To save the world we need: a substantial price on carbon, a faster path to developing advanced nuclear power (in addition to continuing renewables deployment), a major rollout of lab-grown meat as soon as it's affordable with decent quality, negative emissions methods both technological (direct air capture) and biological (kelp, reforesting), and maybe some kind of solar radiation management if things go too far.

In short we need a global WWII-level effort. Instead we're encouraging people to ride bikes and eat their veggies.

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#25

Post by nerdponx »

nhangen wrote: post #21
fredley wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you don't want to go vegan, it's easy to eat less meat (and probably good for your health if you have a Western diet). My partner is vegetarian, I eat meat occasionally (and when I do I eat good meat, ethically and sustainably farmed). Reducing meat consumption is by far the easiest way to reduce your carbon footprint.

Hate to break it to you, but there is no such thing as ethically farmed meat. If it’s killed for your plate, it’s still bad karma.

This is a matter of opinion, not fact. With dairy, you might have a point.

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#26

Post by prolikewh0a »

etaty wrote: post #12
ForHackernews wrote: post #6

Yet more bad news on the climate change front. Based on previous discussions on HN, I'm sure there will be plenty of people proposing ambitious and creative technological solutions. I fear that there's an anthropic bias[0] at work where humans are convinced we will solve this problem because we've always solved other problems before. But we forget that if we hadn't solved those previous issues, we wouldn't be here to…

We already have solved the issue. We know how to produce massive amount of energy, all day long. We just don't want to implement it, because of local incident risk. And because of this we are in the middle of a global incident. Technology available in 5 years are already too late.

>We just don't want to implement it, because of local incident risk.

More likely due to capital. It's always capital. We're going to kill all life for capital.

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#27

Post by adrianN »

nhangen wrote: post #21
fredley wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you don't want to go vegan, it's easy to eat less meat (and probably good for your health if you have a Western diet). My partner is vegetarian, I eat meat occasionally (and when I do I eat good meat, ethically and sustainably farmed). Reducing meat consumption is by far the easiest way to reduce your carbon footprint.

Hate to break it to you, but there is no such thing as ethically farmed meat. If it’s killed for your plate, it’s still bad karma.

You don't acknowledge an ethical difference between a pig that has never seen the sun and lived on barely enough room to stand and a pig that has been held in a way that accommodated its natural behaviors?

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#28

Post by pelario »

fredley wrote: post #4
lucidguppy wrote: post #3

1) Go watch the movie cowspiracy on netflix. Go vegan. 2) Get an energy audit and see if your home needs more insulation. If a solar panel installation will pay for itself in a reasonable time where you live (rebates - SRECs - etc) consider getting one. 3) If you live in a warmer climate with safe biking paths - get an electric bike to go to work. 4) The next car you get should be electric or plugin hybrid. Even if i…

Even if you don't want to go vegan, it's easy to eat less meat (and probably good for your health if you have a Western diet). My partner is vegetarian, I eat meat occasionally (and when I do I eat good meat, ethically and sustainably farmed). Reducing meat consumption is by far the easiest way to reduce your carbon footprint.

This. I have seen and experienced how a radical view of vegetarianism (or veganism) deters people from doing anything about their meat consumption. Specially people who likes meat.

After meeting a couple of "relaxed vegetarians", who said something like "I'm vegetarian, but if there is no vegetarian option, I can eat meat too" my partner became pseudo vegetarian: she allows herself to eat meet one weekend per month. As myself, I became indoors vegetarian, as we do not consume meet indoors.

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#29

Post by Cieplak »

cft wrote: post #10

Nuclear war can reverse global warming [1]. Some argue that since nuclear weapons exist, they will likely be used sooner or later. 1. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110223-nucl...

The nuclear explosions would send massive clouds of dust high into the stratosphere, blocking so much sunlight that a nuclear winter would result. Global temperatures would plunge 20°C to 40°C for several months, and remain 2 - 6°C lower for 1-3 years. Up to 70% of the Earth's protective stratospheric ozone layer would be destroyed, allowing huge doses of ultraviolet light to reach the surface. This UV light would kill much of the marine life that forms the basis of the food chain, resulting in the collapse many fisheries and the starvation of the people and animals that depend it. The UV light would also blind huge numbers of animals, who would then wander sightlessly and starve. The cold and dust would create widespread crop failures and global famine, killing billions of people who did not die in the nuclear explosions. The "nuclear winter" papers were widely credited with helping lead to the nuclear arms reduction treaties of the 1990s, as it was clear that we risked catastrophic global climate change in the event of a full-scale nuclear war.

https://www.wunderground.com/resources/climate/nuke.asp

Re: Oceans 'soaking up more heat than estimated'

#30

Post by nhangen »

adrianN wrote: post #27
nhangen wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hate to break it to you, but there is no such thing as ethically farmed meat. If it’s killed for your plate, it’s still bad karma.

You don't acknowledge an ethical difference between a pig that has never seen the sun and lived on barely enough room to stand and a pig that has been held in a way that accommodated its natural behaviors?

There is an ethical difference yes, but it’s still a net negative. We don’t need to kill in order to eat. We just choose to.
Post reply on HN