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

Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

goodnewsnetwork.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 189 posts

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#31

Post by blotter_paper »

devmunchies wrote: post #23
blotter_paper wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I only care about ecology minded governments and I don’t care about left or right. It’s the only important issue at this point. This is a rather strong statement given that it comes right after a recognition that fascist governments have historically had some ecologically friendly ideals. Are we talking about accepting literal genocide? Like, if we don't take care of the environment then everybody dies, so a fascist…

IF we are taking about the end of the human race, which is in fact a possibility if we continue with the current trends, then anything that could curb human appetites and populations is free game IMO. People don’t realize what’s at stake. Interpret that how you like.

Okay, so we're talking about genocide not as an acceptable loss in exchange for sound environmental policy but rather as an environmental policy in its own right through its active reduction in the number of living humans. Glad we cleared that up. What do you think the chances of us having a lively planet in 200 years are without your proposed mass killings? What is your ideal target number for how many humans would be left after a purge, and how does it affect your guesstimates for how likely our planet is to survive? If you're willing to suggest mass killings, I suspect that you've given those sorts of questions some thought. It would be hard to justify mass killings if you didn't have some strong opinions about how likely ecological armageddon is in both scenarios.

Edit: typo.

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#32

Post by black-tea »

adnzzzzZ wrote: post #27
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially with Brazil's fascist[1] new president, Jair Bolsonaro, making moves to destroy the amazon: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/brazils-bo... [1] Not an exaggeration. https://www.thenation.com/article/a-genuine-fascist-is-on-th...

80% of my country's (Brazil) energy generation is done through renewable means. This isn't even close to true for most first world countries, and certainly not the US. Maybe before worrying about countries you know nothing about (as well as carelessly calling our elected officials fascists) you should start looking at your own, wherever you're from. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electrici...

Indeed. Americans are quick to point their fat fingers at others while they drive their humongous vehicles to the drive-through.

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#33

Post by avar »

beachy wrote: post #20
FriedPickles wrote: post #18

From what I understand, the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide will have a massive greening effect on the Earth (plants love CO2). But it seems this fact is usually omitted so as not to complicate the intended message. I always found it ironic that the "eco" mode button in many cars is a leaf icon.

It's not a slam dunk that more CO2 == good for plants. As per https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/09/13/food-nutrie... > As best scientists can tell, this is what happens: Rising CO2 revs up photosynthesis, the process that helps plants transform sunlight to food. This makes plants grow, but it also leads them to pack in more carbohydrates like glucose at the expense of other nutrients that we depend on, like…

The GP is talking about a "greening effect" on the Earth due to CO^2, but the article you've linked to and this quote is talking about how the nutritional content of plants for human consumption might suffer with more CO^2.

Unless you think that the only thing that's "good for plants" is their suitability for being eaten by humans this seems like an unrelated issue.

The vast majority of the Earth's plant biomass isn't going to be eaten by humans. You're not going to nibble on the oak tree in your back yard, but increased CO^2 in the air will make it more efficient at sequestering carbon.

It's not going to be some amazing increase in perceived growth rate. The CO^2 level indoors is often 2-3x what it is outside, and people already grow plants in those conditions.

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#35

Post by icebraining »

adnzzzzZ wrote: post #27
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially with Brazil's fascist[1] new president, Jair Bolsonaro, making moves to destroy the amazon: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/brazils-bo... [1] Not an exaggeration. https://www.thenation.com/article/a-genuine-fascist-is-on-th...

80% of my country's (Brazil) energy generation is done through renewable means. This isn't even close to true for most first world countries, and certainly not the US. Maybe before worrying about countries you know nothing about (as well as carelessly calling our elected officials fascists) you should start looking at your own, wherever you're from. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electrici...

80% of the electricity generation, not energy.

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#36

Post by icebraining »

blotter_paper wrote: post #19
jewelry wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

technically, we have no stand to blame them on developing their economy...

Here's a fun thought: they could hold the rainforest hostage. Hey world that relies on our land to absorb carbon, we're gonna start deforesting and developing x acres per year unless you pay us y dollars not to. Nice biosphere you've got here, it'd be a shame if somebody threw a brick through the equilibrium...

Equador tried that [1]. The world didn't care.

[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/09/02/216878935/ecua...

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#37

Post by skilled »

jewelry wrote: post #10
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially with Brazil's fascist[1] new president, Jair Bolsonaro, making moves to destroy the amazon: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/brazils-bo... [1] Not an exaggeration. https://www.thenation.com/article/a-genuine-fascist-is-on-th...

technically, we have no stand to blame them on developing their economy...

Who is them? I didn't know countries had divinely invoked certificates for owning the planet. It is all in your head buddy.

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#38

Post by semi-extrinsic »

adnzzzzZ wrote: post #27
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially with Brazil's fascist[1] new president, Jair Bolsonaro, making moves to destroy the amazon: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/brazils-bo... [1] Not an exaggeration. https://www.thenation.com/article/a-genuine-fascist-is-on-th...

80% of my country's (Brazil) energy generation is done through renewable means. This isn't even close to true for most first world countries, and certainly not the US. Maybe before worrying about countries you know nothing about (as well as carelessly calling our elected officials fascists) you should start looking at your own, wherever you're from. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electrici...

I've noticed a trend where Americans outright call Bolsonaro a fascist, even serious economists appearing on podcasts. I suspect they are compensating for not being "allowed" to call their own president what they really want to.

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#39

Post by spiderfarmer »

beachy wrote: post #21
devmunchies wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think being a fascist has anything to do with deforestation. There’s a history of fascists wanting to preserve the “motherland”. Even views such as ecofascism as portrayed in Linkola’s Can Life Prevail? I only care about ecologically minded governments and I don’t care about left or right. It’s the only important issue at this point.

[flagged]

Democrats conceding on these issues will leave the US with an orange clown as president for four more years.

Re: Nasa Happily Reports the Earth Is Greener

#40

Post by tejtm »

wyattpeak wrote: post #6
b_tterc_p wrote: post #3

The title says trees but I think it really means “greenness” from a satillite view. Reading around the bottom, while India and China have done substantial tree planting programs, it sounds like a large chunk of this may be driven by unsustainable use of farm land. I’m not clear on how their increased farm usage corresponds to greenness and whether that matters. Would be curious if anyone can chime in.

From the abstract of the study[1]: > The greening in China is from forests (42%) and croplands (32%), but in India is mostly from croplands (82%) with minor contribution from forests (4.4%). I can't comment on the sequestration effects of farms, though, beyond my ken. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0220-7

To sequester, the carbon has to stay put, Crops are typically harvested annually fields are tilled and rotated so amortized, they will buffer a much smaller amount of carbon that cycles rapidly.
Post reply on HN