NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

Post by avip » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 5:55 AM UTC

zaroth wrote: post #9

ghouse wrote: post #6

The cost to mitigate global warming is much less than the cost that humanity will bear if it isn't mitigated. This is often argued as binary: 0) doing something will destroy the economy, 1) doing nothing will destroy the world. But in reality, there is quite a bit that can be done that doesn't cost that much. The innovators require the price signal. Externalities need to be internalized before the market can solve th…

For starters, lets feed the cows some seaweed. IMO technology is very rapidly evolving which will drastically reduce emissions with very little negative trade-offs, and in fact, do so in an economically competitive fashion. The EV cars don’t just emit nothing, they are also better cars in almost every respect. The seaweed cows don’t just not fart methane, they grow fatter for less feed. The solar power isn’t just gre…

Post by minitoar » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 6:07 AM UTC

systematical wrote: post #4

Prediction: we'll break that record again in the next few years, then again, and again.

Post by spullara » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 6:14 AM UTC

skosch wrote: post #49

sanxiyn wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not familiar with US politics, but looking at your link, the bill is sponsored by 58 Democrats and 1 Republicans. Is it a usual practice to describe such bills as bipartisan?

Good question. Republicans in particular need to worry about primary challenges in their science-illiterate districts, and many may be wary of attaching their name to this directly. But there are a good handful of deep red congresspeople who are happy to discuss policy details around carbon pricing, even if they can't politically afford cosponsorship [0]. I imagine that several of those may be willing to vote for suc…

Post by vixen99 » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 6:28 AM UTC

beders wrote: post #18

teslabox wrote: post #10

July is hotter than January, even though the planet is closer to the sun in January, because there is more land in the northern hemisphere than the Southern Hemisphere. There was a submission ~3 months ago regarding this phenomenon: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20012565 I’m certain there’s a submarine agenda behind most of these “hottest month EVAR” stories. /methinks it’d be much more productive to focus on…

Do you have a link to a study that has better science in it than the IPCC report? Is there a such a study? If not, maybe, just maybe, the climate scientist are right and the ever increasing CO2 is the culprit. Maybe.

Post by js8 » Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 6:32 AM UTC

abootstrapper wrote: post #55

sanxiyn wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not familiar with US politics, but looking at your link, the bill is sponsored by 58 Democrats and 1 Republicans. Is it a usual practice to describe such bills as bipartisan?

The goal of the bill is bipartisan support. What makes the bill bipartisan is it does not attempt to grow government by creating new tax revenues, or regulations. Instead of increasing tax revenue the carbon fee is paid directly to the tax payer. Instead of additional regulations the gradually increasing fee incentivizes industry to reduce their use of fossil fuels.