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

CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

ourworldindata.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#81

Post by adrianN »

NotPaidToPost wrote: post #64
TeMPOraL wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Population growth is slowing itself. So we have that covered. And now what? Turns out, it's not enough, not even before considering that 2/3 of this population is still in developing countries, which are going to increase their emission levels in the pursuit of decent quality of life.

And thus population control is critical... QED. We don't have that covered at all at the moment: We are already 7 billions and will possibly be 11+ billions by the end of the century. That's insane. Let's not forget that emissions are only a tiny part of the pressure we put on the environment.

Unless you plan on killing the top 90% GHG emitters over the next fifteen years or so, reducing population levels is not an option. Slowing population growth is important, but it's not a solution.

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#82

Post by adrianN »

mikepurvis wrote: post #46
adrianN wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather see a global tax on carbon. Suddenly Bitcoins mined with coal are no longer profitable.

Isn't that kind of what agreements like the Paris accord are supposed to accomplish? Individual nations retain sovereignty and can set their own precise laws, but as long as everyone's above some baseline you can't arbitrage by moving the polluting part of your business to Asia or Africa.

"Supposed to" are the important words. Currently literally no country is taking the Paris agreement seriously.

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#83

Post by NotPaidToPost »

adrianN wrote: post #81
NotPaidToPost wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And thus population control is critical... QED. We don't have that covered at all at the moment: We are already 7 billions and will possibly be 11+ billions by the end of the century. That's insane. Let's not forget that emissions are only a tiny part of the pressure we put on the environment.

Unless you plan on killing the top 90% GHG emitters over the next fifteen years or so, reducing population levels is not an option. Slowing population growth is important, but it's not a solution.

One of the problems we have is people not being able to take a long term view. Everything has always to work within 5 years... Result: nothing is done.

What I wrote should have started at least 30 years ago. As the saying goes, the next best time to start is now.

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#84

Post by perfunctory »

Glench wrote: post #71
frankbreetz wrote: post #8

It is always interesting to see graphs like this, I am curious how much something like a new green deal would move the 2100 temperature line. A common argument against it is that everything depends on China and India. I don't suspect this is true. The USA is one of the highest per capita emitters, it doesn't seem right that we would get to live like that while we take away resources from these other countries who are…

I think Otherlab's analyses talk about this a little: The Green New Deal: The enormous opportunity in shooting for the moon. https://medium.com/otherlab-news/decarbonization-and-gnd-b8d... (electrifying everything with clean generation will reduce energy needs by half even without any changes in lifestyle) How do we decarbonize? https://medium.com/otherlab-news/how-do-we-decarbonize-7fc2f... (A fairly balanced take o…

> electrifying everything with clean generation will reduce energy needs by half even without any changes in lifestyle

This is pretty cool

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#85

Post by adrianN »

NotPaidToPost wrote: post #83
adrianN wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you plan on killing the top 90% GHG emitters over the next fifteen years or so, reducing population levels is not an option. Slowing population growth is important, but it's not a solution.

One of the problems we have is people not being able to take a long term view. Everything has always to work within 5 years... Result: nothing is done. What I wrote should have started at least 30 years ago. As the saying goes, the next best time to start is now.

Unfortunately we have by now reached the time where options that aren't mostly done in ten years come too late to prevent catastrophic climate change.

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#86

Post by NotPaidToPost »

adrianN wrote: post #85
NotPaidToPost wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the problems we have is people not being able to take a long term view. Everything has always to work within 5 years... Result: nothing is done. What I wrote should have started at least 30 years ago. As the saying goes, the next best time to start is now.

Unfortunately we have by now reached the time where options that aren't mostly done in ten years come too late to prevent catastrophic climate change.

It's going to be hard to do anything with the projected 60% population rise by the end of the century, though...

Most of the environmental damage is down to our growing population gobbling up resources.

Of course we should do things to get results quickly but we also have to look longer term if we want to see sustainable results.

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#87

Post by adrianN »

NotPaidToPost wrote: post #86
adrianN wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately we have by now reached the time where options that aren't mostly done in ten years come too late to prevent catastrophic climate change.

It's going to be hard to do anything with the projected 60% population rise by the end of the century, though... Most of the environmental damage is down to our growing population gobbling up resources. Of course we should do things to get results quickly but we also have to look longer term if we want to see sustainable results.

You're right but in my opinion, we'll either figure out how to live carbon neutral more or less regardless how many people we have in the next two decades, or catastrophic climate change will ensure that the projected population rise will never happen.

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#88

Post by frankbreetz »

Glench wrote: post #71
frankbreetz wrote: post #8

It is always interesting to see graphs like this, I am curious how much something like a new green deal would move the 2100 temperature line. A common argument against it is that everything depends on China and India. I don't suspect this is true. The USA is one of the highest per capita emitters, it doesn't seem right that we would get to live like that while we take away resources from these other countries who are…

I think Otherlab's analyses talk about this a little: The Green New Deal: The enormous opportunity in shooting for the moon. https://medium.com/otherlab-news/decarbonization-and-gnd-b8d... (electrifying everything with clean generation will reduce energy needs by half even without any changes in lifestyle) How do we decarbonize? https://medium.com/otherlab-news/how-do-we-decarbonize-7fc2f... (A fairly balanced take o…

I'm really a fan of the new green deal, I am afraid that them trying to couple it with a jobs guarantee and universal healthcare will make it easy for the Republicans to make it look like a power grab. I am a fan of both a jobs guarantee and universal healthcare, but those items are not nearly as important as decarbonizing as quickly as possible.

Re: CO₂ and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions

#89

Post by ZeroGravitas »

frankbreetz wrote: post #88
Glench wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Otherlab's analyses talk about this a little: The Green New Deal: The enormous opportunity in shooting for the moon. https://medium.com/otherlab-news/decarbonization-and-gnd-b8d... (electrifying everything with clean generation will reduce energy needs by half even without any changes in lifestyle) How do we decarbonize? https://medium.com/otherlab-news/how-do-we-decarbonize-7fc2f... (A fairly balanced take o…

I'm really a fan of the new green deal, I am afraid that them trying to couple it with a jobs guarantee and universal healthcare will make it easy for the Republicans to make it look like a power grab. I am a fan of both a jobs guarantee and universal healthcare, but those items are not nearly as important as decarbonizing as quickly as possible.

Seems like if part of the political resistance is people losing jobs in dirty indstries (and since healthcare and employment are bizarrely conjoined) then addressing all three together makes perfect sense.
Post reply on HN