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

Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

climatenexus.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 230 posts

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#11

Post by mises »

newnewpdro wrote: post #4

The scale of human activity has become so large that what may seem like fairly trivial variations can be quite impactful thanks to the multiplication factor. Until we substantially reel in the global population size the situation will continue to be rather precarious.

> reel in the global population size

What does this mean? Forced sterilization? One-child policies? I don't ask this to be confrontational, but because it's a difficult question and I honestly want to hear opinions. Access to contraception doesn't make a difference when the culture still says you have 8 kids. This is borne out by what has happened: continued growth of the third-world population. T

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#12

Post by newnewpdro »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #6
newnewpdro wrote: post #4

The scale of human activity has become so large that what may seem like fairly trivial variations can be quite impactful thanks to the multiplication factor. Until we substantially reel in the global population size the situation will continue to be rather precarious.

What does " substantially reel in the global population size" mean. People that raise this point almost 100% exclusively mean that about "people that are not me"

It means we get our global numbers down to something less problematic, especially when considering basically everyone wants to live comfortably with luxuries like air conditioning, fast transportation, and next day delivery.

If you're suggesting I want other people to have fewer kids while I raise a family myself, you're mistaken - zero kids here and none in my future.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#13

Post by dev_dull »

newnewpdro wrote: post #4

The scale of human activity has become so large that what may seem like fairly trivial variations can be quite impactful thanks to the multiplication factor. Until we substantially reel in the global population size the situation will continue to be rather precarious.

Global birth rate is declining almost across the board. It’s the lowest it’s been in the US in the last 30+ years with no signs of speeding up.

Also be careful what you wish for. Some of our most important social programs (such as social security) have intense insolvency issues as birth rates continue to decline.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#14

Post by dev_dull »

newnewpdro wrote: post #8
tcbawo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Western capitalism seems to be the one thing that has successfully incentivized people to have less kids, later in life. It's not always glamorous, but it's probably better than most alternatives.

That's great and all but there's over a billion people in India alone and a huge fraction of them are still living in poverty, effectively contributing very little currently to factors like co2 emissions. It won't stay that way for much longer. Quality of life tends to increase, and correspondingly impact increases. We already have far too many people if you consider the quality of life is destined to normalize at th…

> Quality of life tends to increase, and correspondingly impact increases

I’m not sure I agree that this is true because it ignores all of the efficiency gains (especially in electronics but in other things as well) we’ve seen the last 50+ years. Not to mention things like renewable solar which is not readily and cheaply available.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#15

Post by cagenut »

mises wrote: post #11
newnewpdro wrote: post #4

The scale of human activity has become so large that what may seem like fairly trivial variations can be quite impactful thanks to the multiplication factor. Until we substantially reel in the global population size the situation will continue to be rather precarious.

> reel in the global population size What does this mean? Forced sterilization? One-child policies? I don't ask this to be confrontational, but because it's a difficult question and I honestly want to hear opinions. Access to contraception doesn't make a difference when the culture still says you have 8 kids. This is borne out by what has happened: continued growth of the third-world population. T

watch these two videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4vjGSiRGKY (17m) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXlJEcrinwg (13m)

the short version is "global feminism"

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#17

Post by mac01021 »

throwaway2048 wrote: post #6
newnewpdro wrote: post #4

The scale of human activity has become so large that what may seem like fairly trivial variations can be quite impactful thanks to the multiplication factor. Until we substantially reel in the global population size the situation will continue to be rather precarious.

What does " substantially reel in the global population size" mean. People that raise this point almost 100% exclusively mean that about "people that are not me"

The OP did not say we need to reel it in over the course of only 1 or 2 generations.

They said that, until we do, the situation will remain precarious. I'm sure you can imagine an (admittedly extremely improbable) scenario where the global population shrinks to 4 billion over the course of 500 years without significant injustice being done to anyone to achieve the shrinkage.

Sadly, when it comes to greenhouse-gas-driven climate change, the timeline on which we will succeed or fail to address the problem is too short for any population size adjustments to be of any use (unless you want to achieve the adjustment by mass murder).

This is probably the source of any misunderstanding between you. The OP is not contemplating mass murder, but does not appreciate the urgency of the climate issue. You appreciate the urgency and so assume the OP must be advocating an "immediate" extermination.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#18

Post by ahmedalsudani »

roenxi wrote: post #10
tcbawo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Western capitalism seems to be the one thing that has successfully incentivized people to have less kids, later in life. It's not always glamorous, but it's probably better than most alternatives.

Not the one thing - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

That started almost 50 years ago. Now China wants its citizens to have more babies, but it has not been able to incentivize them.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#20

Post by lotsofpulp »

dev_dull wrote: post #13
newnewpdro wrote: post #4

The scale of human activity has become so large that what may seem like fairly trivial variations can be quite impactful thanks to the multiplication factor. Until we substantially reel in the global population size the situation will continue to be rather precarious.

Global birth rate is declining almost across the board. It’s the lowest it’s been in the US in the last 30+ years with no signs of speeding up. Also be careful what you wish for. Some of our most important social programs (such as social security) have intense insolvency issues as birth rates continue to decline.

Financial insolvency is a non issue compared to resource and environmental insolvency.
Post reply on HN