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

71–80 of 230 posts

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#71

Post by semi-extrinsic »

jefflombardjr wrote: post #50
oliveshell wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a nice thought, but even if we accept that the global population doing this would stem the tide of climate change (which I am doubtful it would), one quickly realizes that there is no way that the entire global population is going to stop eating animals, and we are back to feeling hopeless. I’m increasingly convinced that carbon sequestration on industrial scales is the only serious way to solve this problem.

> I’m increasingly convinced that carbon sequestration on industrial scales is the only serious way to solve this problem. This is akin to trying to prevent the dust bowl[0] with giant vacuum cleaners. The environment is a system. We are a function of it, not the masters of it. We need to address the feedback loops causing this crisis that we are creating. Even if that would work - As others have pointed out, we don'…

> we don't have the luxury of time to deploy industrial scale carbon sequestration

Yes, we do. It's just that it costs money, and nobody wants to pay up. Same goes for all other realistic climate solutions that we have, unfortunately.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#72

Post by goodcanadian »

bni wrote: post #67
zubspace wrote: post #58

One thing I don't understand is why political leaders aren't all over this? Think about a nation going full green and the effect it could have on neighbouring countries? Or a president understanding, that this problem was of highest importance could be a leader of a global change! Think about the fame! But what do we have instead? Ignorance, unwillingness, a dangerous continuation of the status quo on the state level…

Doing something, I mean really doing something, requires changing our culture. Future generations, if there are ones, will look back at this time and see that we have an oil burning culture. Everything we eat, where we live, fossil fuels have been used to produce and maintain it. If it only was cars that was the problem we would easily solve it. To make a real change a Total War economy would have to be implemented,…

Doing something, I mean really doing something, requires changing our culture.

I'm not sure it's so dire as that. Taking the US as an example (numbers from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis...), the largest source of greenhouse gases is transportation at 29%. A real push to switch to electric cars could have a significant impact without significantly changing the way people live their lives. If presented correctly, people could see it as a net benefit: no longer going out of your way to find a gas/petrol station, you just plug in at home and have a full "tank" every morning.

The next largest source is electricity production (27%). Again, a major push towards green energy would benefit from strong leadership, but it wouldn't impact our culture very much. It makes little difference whether the electricity comes from a coal power station or solar power combined with grid storage as long as my TV turns on.

The next chunk is industry (22%). Most of this is actually for power generation again, so see electricity generation above.

Only now do we get to residential and commercial uses at 12% (mostly heating). Only here are we starting to impact the little people in a big way, and I would argue that even then, changing out my furnace for a heat pump is not going to have a big impact on how I live my life.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#73

Post by vinc »

oliveshell wrote: post #24
spraak wrote: post #22

Often I see comments asking what we can do to combat this, or expressing feeling hopeless. While it is not the complete solution, one direct way is by eliminating your personal consumption of animal products. Animal agriculture is a huge contributor to methane production, especially from cows. > Overall, we conclude that methane emissions associated with both the animal husbandry and fossil fuel industries have large…

It’s a nice thought, but even if we accept that the global population doing this would stem the tide of climate change (which I am doubtful it would), one quickly realizes that there is no way that the entire global population is going to stop eating animals, and we are back to feeling hopeless. I’m increasingly convinced that carbon sequestration on industrial scales is the only serious way to solve this problem.

You know what's the simplest solution for carbon sequestration on industrial scales? Trees! And do you know how we could make space for more trees? By switching as much as we can to plant based diets because it takes a lot more plants to feed the animals that we eat instead of eating the plants directly.

I did an estimation once for Western Europe using FAO stats[1] and by switching to a vegan diet we could roughly double the size of the forests, that's a massive scale! It'll help fighting the climate crisis and it'll also help solving the species extinction crisis in Western Europe. And the cool thing is that we don't need to wait for all the human population to switch overnight to a vegan diet, reducing meat and dairy consumption is a perfectly valid first step that everyone can do! The more people switch diets and the more space will become available for rewilding.

We can already see plant based diets becoming more and more popular, and at the same time it seems that flexitarian diets are also getting quite mainstream. I think there's hope on that front at least.

[1] https://vinc.cc/essays/changing-our-diet-for-a-wilder-world/

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#74

Post by konspence »

goodcanadian wrote: post #72
bni wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing something, I mean really doing something, requires changing our culture. Future generations, if there are ones, will look back at this time and see that we have an oil burning culture. Everything we eat, where we live, fossil fuels have been used to produce and maintain it. If it only was cars that was the problem we would easily solve it. To make a real change a Total War economy would have to be implemented,…

Doing something, I mean really doing something, requires changing our culture. I'm not sure it's so dire as that. Taking the US as an example (numbers from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis... ), the largest source of greenhouse gases is transportation at 29%. A real push to switch to electric cars could have a significant impact without significantly changing the way people live their live…

I agree with most of this post, while I feel it may be hand-waving away from of the details.

For example,

>changing out my furnace for a heat pump is not going to have a big impact on how I live my life

A heat pump is a significant investment which would put the majority of American families into financial turmoil. There needs to be much larger government incentive for these units, for reducing this 12% of emissions to be viable.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#75

Post by Quenty »

rjf72 wrote: post #56
jefflombardjr wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Live stock farming is ~27% of methane production, where fossil fuels are ~33% [1]. Eating an eco friendly diet is great on the individual level, but we should not underscore the drastic need for decisive action on an institutional level. [1] https://whatsyourimpact.org/greenhouse-gases/methane-emissio...

And to emphasize here, those figures are likely both inflated if this article's hypothesis is correct. That being that primarily natural factors are driving the surge. It's because of this, and practical reality, that I don't understand why scrubbing is not considered a bigger part of the discussion on these topics. For instance one new technological solution [1] proposes an atmospheric removal of CO2 that could cost…

I think the assumption is we need to actually go carbon negative in the long term. So scrubbing with be essential in the long term.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#76

Post by lordnacho »

zubspace wrote: post #58

One thing I don't understand is why political leaders aren't all over this? Think about a nation going full green and the effect it could have on neighbouring countries? Or a president understanding, that this problem was of highest importance could be a leader of a global change! Think about the fame! But what do we have instead? Ignorance, unwillingness, a dangerous continuation of the status quo on the state level…

> One thing I don't understand is why political leaders aren't all over this?

The incentives are just not there within the current system. When was the environment a major topic in an election anywhere? It's always pitted against "the economy" despite being part of the economy.

Add to that there's no immediate visible benefits. A political term is a few years. If the climate stays liveable for a few years, nobody is going to notice.

Plus most countries are small. It doesn't matter if France or the UK go totally green. What's needed is international influence so that everyone goes green. Who is going to run on a platform of "We'll go green, and I'll convince the rest of the world as well"?

It is much easier to frame climate change as a made up political issue than to actually try to do anything about it.

It boggles the mind that our one hope is an authoritarian state run by engineers.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#77

Post by avip »

zubspace wrote: post #58

One thing I don't understand is why political leaders aren't all over this? Think about a nation going full green and the effect it could have on neighbouring countries? Or a president understanding, that this problem was of highest importance could be a leader of a global change! Think about the fame! But what do we have instead? Ignorance, unwillingness, a dangerous continuation of the status quo on the state level…

I think the actual power of political leaders is overstated. In many countries, the political system seems de-facto paralyzed, ineffective, and incapable of pushing the drastic changes required.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#78

Post by goodcanadian »

konspence wrote: post #74
goodcanadian wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing something, I mean really doing something, requires changing our culture. I'm not sure it's so dire as that. Taking the US as an example (numbers from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis... ), the largest source of greenhouse gases is transportation at 29%. A real push to switch to electric cars could have a significant impact without significantly changing the way people live their live…

I agree with most of this post, while I feel it may be hand-waving away from of the details. For example, >changing out my furnace for a heat pump is not going to have a big impact on how I live my life A heat pump is a significant investment which would put the majority of American families into financial turmoil. There needs to be much larger government incentive for these units, for reducing this 12% of emissions…

Indeed, the heat pump is a significant investment. My point, however, is that you can start addressing 75-80% of CO2 emissions before you get to that point.

Edit: all of these things are expensive and require strong leadership, but strong leadership is what the original comment was talking about.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#79

Post by _ph_ »

konspence wrote: post #74
goodcanadian wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing something, I mean really doing something, requires changing our culture. I'm not sure it's so dire as that. Taking the US as an example (numbers from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emis... ), the largest source of greenhouse gases is transportation at 29%. A real push to switch to electric cars could have a significant impact without significantly changing the way people live their live…

I agree with most of this post, while I feel it may be hand-waving away from of the details. For example, >changing out my furnace for a heat pump is not going to have a big impact on how I live my life A heat pump is a significant investment which would put the majority of American families into financial turmoil. There needs to be much larger government incentive for these units, for reducing this 12% of emissions…

They are more expensive to buy and set up but should save money in operating costs. So just offering special loans for heat pumps (low interest) could give them a huge boost.

Re: Unexpected Surge in Global Methane Levels

#80

Post by rdiddly »

inflatableDodo wrote: post #31
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.

I think this viewpoint originates from a stunning lack of imagination.

You're right, anything is possible in Imaginaryland!
Post reply on HN