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

Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

nrk.no

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 213 posts

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#191

Post by dntbnmpls »

darkmighty wrote: post #168
euix wrote: post #134

The thing about climate change is that some small proportion of the population, probably elites, farsighted and lucky will likely benefit from it, in the form of profiting off the weakest and more vulnerable by providing some sort of assistance or accommodation, from new industries that will arise to accommodate or from arbitrage on land that will become uninhabitable versus that which will become newly inhabitable.…

This is too contrived an explanation (for the general climate change denialism), I think. I think there are two facets to it: 1) Some industries refuse to even consider it because it means they're effectively dead -- coal, oil, and a few other industries. They fuel propaganda because of this 2) Sheer ignorance I say because it's very difficult and fragile to try and profit off a genuine catastrophe. We are indeed hea…

> 1) Some industries refuse to even consider it because it means they're effectively dead -- coal, oil, and a few other industries.

If coal/oil/gas is dead then most of humanity is dead too. Do you realize that coal, oil, gas are responsible for almost all of the world's energy production?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bp_world_energy_consumpti...

Not to mention the world's agricultural production is dependent on oil, not just for transportation, but also for petrochemical fertizilers.

Also, almost every product ( medicine, electronic, clothes, etc ) have petrochemical derivatives in them. If those fossil fuel industries are dead, then civilization ends and most of humanity dies.

> They fuel propaganda because of this

There are plenty of propaganda on both sides along with the fearmongering. And the propaganda and fearmongering doesn't help anything.

Unless there is some technological breakthrough in energy production, we aren't going to stop using fossil fuels.

Much of the world is underdeveloped and looking to industrialize.

There are 1.3 billion people without electricity. Can you believe that?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/world/world-without-...

Climate change isn't a political issue. It is a technological one. Europeans aren't going to give up fossil fuels to end their first world lifestyle and destroy their society and starve themselves to death. The chinese are going to use as much fossil fuels needed to reach the first world lifestyle of the europeans. Indians, once they get their act together, are going to follow in china's footsteps. Same goes for ASEAN. And eventually Africa, etc. Can't expect the poor nations to stay poor forever. And of course, we aren't going to give up fossil fuels anytime soon in the US, especially since we just became a fossil fuel energy exporter recently.

So given these realities, what do you think the climate change issue is really about? It certainly isn't about fossil fuels or reducing fossil fuels because it's simply not possible anytime soon. So what is it about?

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#192

Post by graeme »

koheripbal wrote: post #102
deanclatworthy wrote: post #69

What I have found more frustrating than those in denial of climate change lately, is those who deny responsibility. That the real problem is in other countries. India. China. America. Little old X in Europe can't possible be the ones that need to sort it out. Therefore there's no point changing our habits. I feel a little hopeless in these discussions. I have little hope for change. I cannot argue against the fact th…

The only way to combat a Tragedy of the Commons problem is through collective action. Unilateral changes actually have a net negative impact because other parties simply consume more (CO2 in this case).

The thing is, the people blaming others also tend to strongly oppose collective action solutions.

Eg a carbon tax is better than individual action. And if combined with an international effort to apply it to imports, it would be even more effective.

But the people in question tend to say “oh, it could never be done. Others would oppose. [let’s do nothing]”

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#193

Post by lucian1900 »

koheripbal wrote: post #104
CuriousSkeptic wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One way to approach this perhaps is to look at emissions per capita. Norway, as an example, is a way bigger offender (or at least has been, haven’t check recent data) than China by this metric. And it _is_ a political problem at this point. You cant really demand change from people around you if you’re not prepared to do the same yourself.

I think a more useful metric is per unit of GDP . ...because then it becomes an efficiency metric. "How much wealth can we create with X amount of CO2".

Interestingly, China wins over North America and Europe on both metrics.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#194

Post by lopmotr »

Invictus0 wrote: post #56
dghughes wrote: post #37

I'm certainly on the climate change team (if that's what you call it). But are articles like this good or bad? When confronting climate change deniers the standard response is "weather is not climate". Saying it's hot today or cold today isn't an indication of climate change. It's what occurs over hundreds of years but especially the last 150 years. It seems we are sending mixed signals saying that one day or a decad…

Climate change deniers cannot be convinced by science because their objections are not based on any facts. The science on climate change is unimpeachable and has been known as such for decades.

You understand that proving causation is extremely difficult in a complex system where you can't run controlled experiments? You essentially have to have a correct model. But how do you verify your model is correct? You still can't run experiments to test it because there's only one Earth. You can use historical data but if your model was designed using that data, then you can't use it again to test it. This is one of the hardest types of task in science. Not "unimpeachable" by any means.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#195

Post by lopmotr »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #169
lopmotr wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No we shouldn't! You don't give up the principles of science just to expedite your political ideals. If you were going to do that, why bother with science in the first place? Just declare it so and shout it until everyone believes you! I have memories of world 30 years ago being hotter than it is today. I don't credit it to "global cooling" because I'm not that silly. You shouldn't be either. You'll never notice a de…

If you understood science you'd understand why "you'll never notice a degree C of average temperature change" is wholly, irrevocably, unarguably, objectively, and absolutely scientifically incorrect. The scientific reality is that climate models have made decently accurate predictions so far. The whole point of the models is that 1C or 2C of change is not just about your own personal subjective experience of how warm…

You can't notice it personally without doing science. You can't just remember how hot it was when you were a kid and know that global warming is happening. That's what the GP was talking about and what I'm responding to. Obviously scientists can measure it with suitable instruments and techniques but casual observers can't. I think you're arguing with a strawman by bringing floods and fires into it. But even if you want to go there, experiencing one flood in your life doesn't tell you that the frequency is higher than it was 30 years ago. There just isn't enough data or valid statistics in one person's personal experience and feelings.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#196

Post by darkmighty »

dntbnmpls wrote: post #191
darkmighty wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is too contrived an explanation (for the general climate change denialism), I think. I think there are two facets to it: 1) Some industries refuse to even consider it because it means they're effectively dead -- coal, oil, and a few other industries. They fuel propaganda because of this 2) Sheer ignorance I say because it's very difficult and fragile to try and profit off a genuine catastrophe. We are indeed hea…

> 1) Some industries refuse to even consider it because it means they're effectively dead -- coal, oil, and a few other industries. If coal/oil/gas is dead then most of humanity is dead too. Do you realize that coal, oil, gas are responsible for almost all of the world's energy production? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bp_world_energy_consumpti... Not to mention the world's agricultural production is dependent o…

Doing all those things is possible and there are clear plans to do them, at significant economical costs but nothing that our economies can't handle. This is the technological solution: transition out of oil and carbon in general! We already have I'd say 90% of the technological capability to achieve it and sufficient economic resources (in fact it's happening even without subsidies in many places).

Europe is already on IPCC 2C targets, and it's clearly not starving, its economy is fine. What they need to do is show the rest of the world how we're toast without action.

Just look at the 3 or 4C targets -- that themselves largely predict quick oil phase out! Civilization runs real risk of collapse before the end of the century in those targets, and 3 decades from now it'll already start looking bleak. Imagine if we do nothing.

I guess the most dark humor thing is (most) people imagining their kids living in happy wonderlands, making retirement plans, etc. while the world is literally going to hell.

It really feels like a failure of science, technology and engineering community. We're failing at communicating. Because I owe to and admire so much of our scientific history and people, I'll gladly campaign for climate action to my last day (or at least until we're at a somewhat sane track).

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#197

Post by lopmotr »

leto_ii wrote: post #150
lopmotr wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. See the enormous volume and consistency of anecdotal evidence for ineffective medicine. Most of China has believed and recreated the same false anecdotes about their TCM for thousands of years! Remember bloodletting? astrology? praying to God? If you don't apply methods for protecting yourself from human bias, then you're bound to fall victim to human bias.

Ok, so what standard of evidence for anthropogenic climate change would you accept?

I don't know, but I would reject all anecdotes. If somebody measured the temperatures around the world for many decades, I could accept that shows global temperature rise. Turns out they did and I do. That's data, not anecdotes. As for proving the cause, I don't know enough to understand how reliable that is. But climate scientists seem pretty sure of themselves so I accept their conclusions as much as any well studied science conclusions.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#198

Post by bett3513 »

aksss wrote: post #97
bett3513 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree, I live in Southeast Australia and have never seen so many people accept climate change as real as this past summer. If it takes a slight misunderstanding about weather relating to climate change to get immediate action, isn’t that a good thing?

"If it takes [mistruth] to get [policy change I want], isn't that a good thing?" vs. education and truth? Where does that slippery slope end?

It ends that it isn’t a complete mistruth, just a small hyperbole. The massive bushfires we’re still experiencing are real, the hail storms that followed were real and the 40+ days in hazardous air quality since 1 Dec are also real. As is the past 20 years of drought my country has experienced.

These events were definitively contributed to by climate change, perhaps not direct cause and effect as some assume, but there is more than just correlation.

Re: Global warming has begun to make Norway warmer and wetter

#200

Post by dntbnmpls »

darkmighty wrote: post #196
dntbnmpls wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1) Some industries refuse to even consider it because it means they're effectively dead -- coal, oil, and a few other industries. If coal/oil/gas is dead then most of humanity is dead too. Do you realize that coal, oil, gas are responsible for almost all of the world's energy production? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bp_world_energy_consumpti... Not to mention the world's agricultural production is dependent o…

Doing all those things is possible and there are clear plans to do them, at significant economical costs but nothing that our economies can't handle. This is the technological solution : transition out of oil and carbon in general! We already have I'd say 90% of the technological capability to achieve it and sufficient economic resources (in fact it's happening even without subsidies in many places). Europe is alread…

> Doing all those things is possible

Renewables make up almost 0% of the total energy used by the world. Getting rid of fossil fuels or the fossil fuel industry is simply not possible. This is basic economics and physics. It's science.

> in fact it's happening even without subsidies in many places

Name one place where subsidies didn't prop up renewables.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/05/home-sol...

https://ieefa.org/subsidy-cuts-result-in-sharp-drop-in-u-k-r...

The green energy industry itself admits it needs subsidies to exist hence why they lobby for more subsidies.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2015/09/01/solar...

> Europe is already on IPCC 2C targets, and it's clearly not starving, its economy is fine.

That's because Europe's fossil fuel use hasn't dropped. It has actually increased. Not only that, europe is building or trying to build pipelines from russia and the middle east to meet their energy needs. What do you the instability in syria was about? What do you think the geopolitical skirmish with russia is about? Pipelines and fossil fuels. Europe wants more of it, not less.

> It really feels like a failure of science, technology and engineering community. We're failing at communicating.

No. The communication is fine if you actually read and understand the science, technology and engineering. If you get your information from fearmongering newspapers, cable news or social media, then you have a real problem.

While you worry about the end of the world, the science/tech/engineering community is planning future research into the 30s, 40s, etc. Space flight into the 30s, 40s. Mega construction projects in the 30s, 40s, etc - some of which will last decades. Surely if the world was going to end, these highly intelligent people wouldn't be wasting time and resources on such projects.

I don't want to add to your anxiety, but the indian subcontinent, ASEAN, middle east, south america and africa are going to industrialize heavily in the coming decades. Conservatively, they make up about 40% of the world's population. So fossil fuel use is going to go up in the coming decades.

So economics, science and reality says that fossil fuel use is going to increase. So if you are really sincere in what you say, then ask yourself, what is all the climate change rhetoric really about?

Post reply on HN