Live data from Hacker News

Australia’s Darling River is running dry

widerimage.reuters.com

81–90 of 172 posts

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#81
post #14

This article is a perfect example of why the climate change issue is so polarized - it's just so full of propaganda and lies that the important truth it talks about is glossed over with mistrust. "Reduced to a string of stagnant mustard-coloured pools, fouled in places with pesticide runoff and stinking with the rotting carcasses of cattle and fish, the Darling River is running dry." This river runs dry regularly and…

Why are you against collective action? Because it could ... make a difference or something?

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australia would be a net power exporting nation if they harnessed their solar and especially wind resources. The fact that they still burn coal is ridiculous and shameful.

To where and how? Electricity is not something you can export when your main grid is 5000km from your nearest neighbour

Typically power is exported by smelting aluminum from bauxite. A big advantage of doing it this way is you can run the smelters only when there is an overproduction of power to help even out demand on the grid.

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#84
post #72
post #67

Australia has a serious problem with water, and it would have a serious problem even without climate change. The water in the Darling, and in any river, can be extracted free of charge if your land includes the river. This produces permanent drought conditions in a country that exports oranges. Australia has limited water resources and laws that treat it as unlimited. It will be incredibly hard to square that circle.…

It could be simply solved by selling water usage rights or incentivizing saving water wherever the river runs. This was done with success in some parts of the US.

Cities require relatively little water for the economic output they produce, compared to farmers.

If you require farmers to pay full price for the water they consume, they will never be able to afford it.

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think GP is saying that climate change itself is hyperbole. The problem is that reporting on both sides is garbage laden with misunderstandings and outright lies. This fuels the anti-climate movement, especially when it's coming from the 'pro' side like in this case. I've been ringing bells about catastrophic climate change since the early 00s after being involved in a relevant research project, I'm the polar…

Do climate change scientists pay hundreds of millions of dollars to climate change PR firms to spread known untruths about climate change? Is there a network of climate change science think tanks dedicated to framing the climate change debate in a way that benefits the climate change community? Do climate scientists run social media "consultancies" to make a pro-climate change case on the major social platforms and s…

> What in your opinion would be the best way to counter climate denial PR?

With education. And with a factual description of the problem and the available solutions. With outright rejection of denialism. With rejection of feelgood non-activism like plastic straw bans and tree-planting measures. Don't get me wrong, those things are good and a step in the right direction, but they're far too little far too late compared to what must be done, and so they're inactivism that wastes public energy on measures that don't move the needle in addressing the problem.

This doesn't even fly with 'enlightened' crowds like HN out of the box because they'll tend to kneejerk about things like nuclear power + electrochemical CO2 sequestration despite it being the only realistic option to dig ourselves out of the hole we're in. Worth noting that the mainstream crowds in China/Russia are a lot more pragmatic about this than AU/UK/US.

I'm pretty sure this comment is going to be downvoted just for mentioning it, but I'll drop it anyway to genuinely answer your question. A lot of the folk I know in the field have basically given up hope to avert this and become gloom and doom in the last 5 years, including people you would've seen on TV at the Paris Accords. They are probably right. It's pretty depressing info to handle. I'm sorry I don't have a better answer, but people much smarter than me don't seem to have one either.

tl;dr: Like Bill Gates puts it, misdirected climate activists are actually a bigger problem than climate deniers at this point.

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#86
post #4

Meanwhile we're still voting in governments that don't believe in climate change and which fight tooth and nail to destroy any chance of addressing the problem. No worries giving endless buckets of taxpayer money to climate-denying farmers and coal plants, though.

The IPCC gave models to scientists that are necessarily missing part of the picture (namely, all energy from the sun that is not part of a specific EMR spectrum)[1], and then said "we have a consensus" when the scientists came back with an inevitable conclusion. This resulted in the inevitable false attribution of human activity being the cause of [strike: global warming] climate change. To fully appreciate the gravi…

Please provide reproduced, peer-reviewed sources for these extraordinary claims.

While you're at it, please explain, with reproduced, peer-reviewed sources why you think the greenhouse effect, which directly ties CO2 to warming doesn't exist.

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#87
post #4

Meanwhile we're still voting in governments that don't believe in climate change and which fight tooth and nail to destroy any chance of addressing the problem. No worries giving endless buckets of taxpayer money to climate-denying farmers and coal plants, though.

The IPCC gave models to scientists that are necessarily missing part of the picture (namely, all energy from the sun that is not part of a specific EMR spectrum)[1], and then said "we have a consensus" when the scientists came back with an inevitable conclusion. This resulted in the inevitable false attribution of human activity being the cause of [strike: global warming] climate change. To fully appreciate the gravi…

:|

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#88
post #84
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be simply solved by selling water usage rights or incentivizing saving water wherever the river runs. This was done with success in some parts of the US.

Cities require relatively little water for the economic output they produce, compared to farmers. If you require farmers to pay full price for the water they consume, they will never be able to afford it.

Cities also need food. The price of food would go up and some sorts of farming might become uneconomical, but food would still be farmed.

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#89
post #84
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be simply solved by selling water usage rights or incentivizing saving water wherever the river runs. This was done with success in some parts of the US.

Cities require relatively little water for the economic output they produce, compared to farmers. If you require farmers to pay full price for the water they consume, they will never be able to afford it.

Indeed, some forms of farming e.g. cotton in Australia are literally unsustainable when exposed to market forces.

Doesn’t mean capitalism is wrong in this case, though.

Re: Australia’s Darling River is running dry

#90
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The IPCC gave models to scientists that are necessarily missing part of the picture (namely, all energy from the sun that is not part of a specific EMR spectrum)[1], and then said "we have a consensus" when the scientists came back with an inevitable conclusion. This resulted in the inevitable false attribution of human activity being the cause of [strike: global warming] climate change. To fully appreciate the gravi…

Please provide reproduced, peer-reviewed sources for these extraordinary claims. While you're at it, please explain, with reproduced, peer-reviewed sources why you think the greenhouse effect, which directly ties CO2 to warming doesn't exist.

1. I added a link to the gp - I'll also provide you with these as food for thought:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2013/oc...

2. Please provide any evidence that I made claims that the greehouse effect doesn't exist.

Post reply on HN