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

NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 130 posts

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#61

Post by sanxiyn »

avip wrote: post #52
zaroth wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Or follow Mumbai and ban eating cows (or make it really expensive). Seriously, pivoting to chicken at scale is more straightforward and has more predictable outcomes.

Or substituting beef with pork. As pork is so much better than beef CO2-wise, I find it strange why people advocate vegetarianism or meat substitute instead of advocating beef/pork substitution.

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#62

Post by dang »

rolltiide wrote: post #13
systematical wrote: post #4

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

Hot and sunny Europe, a paradise for the most regulated decadent chauvinist purposes, thanks, I love it.

Would you please stop posting flamebait and unsubstantive comments? We've had to ask you this multiple times before.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#63

Post by sanxiyn »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #11
RickJWagner wrote: post #2

I live in Central Arkansas, which normally has hot summers. It looks like July was actually a little cooler for us this year. http://www.worldclimate.com/climate/us/arkansas/little-rock https://www.accuweather.com/en/us/little-rock-ar/72201/july-...

These sorts of comments show just how hard understanding complex systems is. We have to make it easy to grasp so we come up with things like “Global warming” or “climate change” for the general public. Which maybe indicates that the change is in a particular direction. But the climate is a system that can be influenced by many factors. I think what you should be worried about is repeated unseasonal weather. Too cool…

The change is in a particular direction. The general public is not mistaken about that.

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#64

Post by rolltiide »

dang wrote: post #62
rolltiide wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hot and sunny Europe, a paradise for the most regulated decadent chauvinist purposes, thanks, I love it.

Would you please stop posting flamebait and unsubstantive comments? We've had to ask you this multiple times before. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Its why I would like climate change though. European summer all year. And their legal brothels are anything but unsubstantive during summer.

Replying to you is always a gamble but not everywhere with democratic consensus is based around silicon valley sensitivities

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#65

Post by abootstrapper »

js8 wrote: post #60
abootstrapper wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So your claim is that it is bipartisan ideologically, not procedurally, right? But I don't think that Republicans actually follow their own ideology of minimal state. Anyway, I think the bill is a good idea (not an American).

I'm not sure what you mean by "procedurally." Republicans can still vote in favor of this bill even if they do not cosponsor it. But the more Republicans cosponsor it the easier it will be politically for other Republicans to vote in favor of it.

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#66

Post by WoahNoun »

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.

The word you are looking for is non-partisan. Bi-partisan means it currently has broad support in both parties. You can't say a bill is bi-partisan if it doesn't actually have that support. Saying you have a goal of bi-partisan support doesn't make the bill bi-partisan. Otherwise, bill proponent could claim the goal of any bill is to be bi-partisan which makes every bill bi-partisan.

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#67

Post by jtolmar »

spullara wrote: post #56
skosch wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The real question is why all government fines aren't structured this way.

You could restructure all externalities taxes to pay a dividend back out of what they raise, but you could instead skip a step and use the money to reduce the amount you need to raise via other taxes. Presumably your general-purpose tax is structured some way that's more efficient than having everyone to pay an equal share, so this is a more efficient option.

But if externalities taxes + dividends are politically expedient then so be it. It sure beats never regulating externalities.

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#68

Post by abootstrapper »

WoahNoun wrote: post #66
abootstrapper wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The word you are looking for is non-partisan. Bi-partisan means it currently has broad support in both parties. You can't say a bill is bi-partisan if it doesn't actually have that support. Saying you have a goal of bi-partisan support doesn't make the bill bi-partisan. Otherwise, bill proponent could claim the goal of any bill is to be bi-partisan which makes every bill bi-partisan.

Call it what you’d like.

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#69

Post by jtolmar »

edejong wrote: post #43
throwaway010718 wrote: post #38

As much as I want to believe climate change can mitigated by individuals making conscientious decisions, it seems as naive as telling someone in 1970 that if they care about the smog then they can just buy a catalytic converter for their own car. Climate change progress, like the catalytic converter, will be 1% innovation and 99% legislation. If you care about this problem please vote. Voting is arguably the most imp…

No, voting is passive. Be politically active: talk to your neighbors, at your local sports club, at work and at local events on climate change. Contact your local legislators. Give options to local polluters by researching options for subsidies. Write to your congressmen and ask for the most pressing local actions. Democracy does not start with a vote. That’s just a step in a large process.

Voting is the victory lap. Organize.

Re: NOAA Data Confirms July Was Hottest Month Ever Recorded

#70

Post by yesenadam »

pavs wrote: post #36
abootstrapper wrote: post #17

There is a bipartisan carbon fee and dividend bill in the United States Congress right now with 59 sponsors[1], called The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act (H.R. 763)[2]. This bill puts a fee on fossil fuels that grows over time. The money collected (minus administrative costs) is paid back to every American to spend as they see fit. Citizen's Climate Lobby is a bipartisan organization of regular people tryi…

This will never pass. This is not simply me being pessimistic. US current government doesn't believe in climate change, and doing everything in its power to roll back whatever progress was made in the last decade or so. The current senate majority is a puppet of the government and will not pass anything Trump doesnt want. And even in the extreme unlikely scenario of it getting passed. It will get vetoed. Since gettin…

Wow, I just briefly looked over that linked wikipedia page, about a wide range of environmental stuff, not 'just' global warming. Absolutely horrifying and unbelievable! (For personal reasons I've been largely out of the news loop this decade, am not in USA.) How is it that all that has been allowed to happen? People in the USA (a majority, or close to it) wanted all those changes?!

Edit: I am getting downvoted for saying that...and really don't know why. If downvoters could explain, I'll be much obliged. Thanks.

Post reply on HN