Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world • Hacker News Board

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#221

Post by _emacsomancer_ » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:46 PM UTC

xoa wrote: post #189

zackmorris wrote: post #100

I'm shocked that the article didn't mention this, but the mass die-offs we're seeing are because the world's coral reefs will be dead by 2050: https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/environment-90-per... https://www.businessinsider.com/great-barrier-reef-could-dis... https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2020/02/24/70-90-per... The effect of this is that 500 million pacific islanders will be forced to flee to So…

> I sure wish a tech billionaire would do something about this. I sure wish VOTERS would "do something" about this, where "something" = vote for the party/parties that actually champion or at least acknowledge the importance of dealing with AGW/CO2 increasing vs actively denying and supporting continuing the current anti-free market policies destroying so much future beauty and potential. This should have been so str…

Sure, but in many cases the politicians who are statistically able to win office are about as likely to do something meaningful (and not just symbolic) about these issues as the tech billionaires are.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#222

Post by bjoli » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:47 PM UTC

rdtwo wrote: post #129

palae wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A science fiction style solution is going to be the only way to feed the world. What about plant-based diets? That doesn't seem too SF to me

They don’t work. You will have gastro intestinal issues on plant only diets. All those vegan you tubers are cheating for a reason.

Now, there are people sensitive to a certain kind of insoluble fibre, and if you are you might have some trouble on a vegan diet, but these people are in a minority. Apart from people wanting to avoid FODMAPs (the fibre group in question), the only problem I have heard of from friends becoming vegan is the transitory flatulence from eating beans.

Anecdotally the worst gastrointestinal problems I have ever had was on whatever version of the standard American diet I was served when visiting the states as a 20-something year old. I couldn't shit for 10 days...

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#223

Post by swhitf » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:47 PM UTC

blobbers wrote: post #181

When I consider the implications for the children of this world, these thoughts make me deeply sad. Not in a way I feel I can directly action. Not in a way that many children don't have bigger problems than saving the whales. Just sad. I hope people share this feeling.

All the time.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#224

Post by all_usernames » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:47 PM UTC

_emacsomancer_ wrote: post #221

xoa wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I sure wish a tech billionaire would do something about this. I sure wish VOTERS would "do something" about this, where "something" = vote for the party/parties that actually champion or at least acknowledge the importance of dealing with AGW/CO2 increasing vs actively denying and supporting continuing the current anti-free market policies destroying so much future beauty and potential. This should have been so str…

Sure, but in many cases the politicians who are statistically able to win office are about as likely to do something meaningful (and not just symbolic) about these issues as the tech billionaires are.

If the ~50% of Americans who choose not to vote, actually did, that would by definition change the politicians who are "able to win."

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#225

Post by core-questions » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:48 PM UTC

xoa wrote: post #189

zackmorris wrote: post #100

I'm shocked that the article didn't mention this, but the mass die-offs we're seeing are because the world's coral reefs will be dead by 2050: https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/environment-90-per... https://www.businessinsider.com/great-barrier-reef-could-dis... https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2020/02/24/70-90-per... The effect of this is that 500 million pacific islanders will be forced to flee to So…

> I sure wish a tech billionaire would do something about this. I sure wish VOTERS would "do something" about this, where "something" = vote for the party/parties that actually champion or at least acknowledge the importance of dealing with AGW/CO2 increasing vs actively denying and supporting continuing the current anti-free market policies destroying so much future beauty and potential. This should have been so str…

> We could just make all our energy usage net neutral in a matter of months/years by finally establishing a Free Market there and then let humanity sort out the best way to reduce the cost of that.

You really think that making business tens or hundreds of times more expensive to take part in will just solve the problem, rather than businesses going under and simply not being able to exist anymore? You don't think any other country will capitalize on this, emit all they want, and sell the products we can't make? You think we'll be able to tariff that enough that it makes up for it?

> the cost of rapid industrial removal of a ton of CO2+margin.

It's not like this is actually being done at scale yet. Do we really think gigantic fans and energy-intensive machinery for CO2 capture are going to work? Shouldn't that energy be being used to replace coal / gas / fossil fuel electricity production first and foremost, and battery (/battery-like technologies, like pumping water behind a dam and other potential-energy schemes) rather than burning the energy off?

Doesn't it make more sense to look at ways of improving the reefs, like making artificial reefs with geo-engineering projects, iron fertilization, etc? Don't plants do a better job of capturing carbon? Maybe we should embrace rapidly-growing invasive alpha species like Japanese Knotweed, Kudzu, etc. and just mow it on down and let it regrow? Shouldn't we spend more money on massive-scale tree planting, soil redistribution, and anti-desertification efforts that we actually know how to do at scale, rather than some pie-in-the-sky unproven carbon capture mechanisms that can somehow only be fueled by strangling everyone's productivity to an unreasonable extent?

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#226

Post by Gieskanne » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:48 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #170

neckardt wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Society just wont change to support it. Maybe this is just me, but I would happily change my diet to be around 50% Soylent or other meal replacement if the cost was cheaper. Currently I eat around 2400 calories a day, with Soylent that costs me $20 a day. I can get Chipotle for ~$15 per day, and between the two Chipotle clearly wins on taste. From what I can tell meal replacements are often far more environmentally…

Due to COVID, I put most of my food at home in a spreadsheet to track inventory so I could figure out how much I had to buy on each shopping trip to last for a week or two. At the moment I have 54938 calories of food on hand (not counting tomatoes, lettuce, and onions that I do not track because I only use them as sandwich toppings or for small salads where they contribute negligible calories). This cost $171.44. Tha…

Thats just a crazy habit to have :)

I feel already bad when i order food twice a month.

It even never occurred to me to do takeout all the time. I have already feel guilty when i see all the packaging for take out and regret it at the moment.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#227

Post by novok » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:49 PM UTC

sharkmerry wrote: post #152

vzidex wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I sure wish a tech billionaire would do something about this. I've noticed in tech that a common hope that people in tech hold is that "the billionaires", in their infinite wisdom and generosity, will pull magical solutions out of their hats and save us all. Like you mention later, yeah, right. > one of the thousand reasons I got out of tech Not an option I've considered much, but it's almost tempting.

>> that "the billionaires", in their infinite wisdom and generosity, will pull magical solutions out of their hats and save us all. Like you mention later, yeah, right. I think its more that they have the means. Cant get anything done on a large scale without lots of moolah

Meh people over-estimate the wealth of billionaires. A $1 billionaire can only buy 1000 houses in the bay area for example, and then make something like $6m/yr in rent from it.

If we take all the wealth of the top 100 billionaries and put it towards the US annual budget, it wouldn't fund it for more than a year or two also and then you'd soon be out of billionaires as you go down the list.

Governments are the real 'wealthy' organizations out there.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#228

Post by khuey » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:50 PM UTC

sethammons wrote: post #213

vzidex wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Some vegetables are luxury food, and less efficient than cattle [Citation needed] I'll assume you're arguing in good faith, but this argument is a common straw man made by people who are against plant-based diets. In fact, the only case where you have a point is that the worst case for chocolate produces more emissions than the best case for beef [1]. Odds are that if you're eating beef in North America it comes fro…

There are vast areas that are very, very poor for growing anything other than some grasses. These lands will not support growing plant based foods for people. However! They do produce plant based food for cattle. You end up with 0.5-2 acres of this land to feed a cow.

The vast majority of beef is not grazed on lands incapable of naturally supporting more intensive forms of agriculture.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#229

Post by RankingMember » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:50 PM UTC

KerrickStaley wrote: post #75

If you're interested in adjusting your seafood eating habits towards eating more sustainable seafood, the Monterey Bay Aquarium maintains a guide on which seafood (based on species and location/method of catch) is most sustainable, somewhat sustainable, and not sustainable. My favorite version of the guide is the printable version that you can fold up and put in your wallet: https://www.seafoodwatch.org/seafood-recom…

I think the intent is great, but what is the percentage of the population that would utilize such a thing in their daily life? Not trying to be a downer, but I think most people don't have the bandwidth to be carrying around little cards reminding them to buy this/don't buy that, "oh, and is that tuna line-caught or pole-caught?", etc. If eating a certain kind of fish is causing environmental damage, we need regulation as a chokepoint somewhere in the chain, whether it be to stop it from being fished or at least from being sold.

Re: Popular seafood species in sharp decline around the world

#230

Post by sumtechguy » Tue, Aug 18, 2020, 5:50 PM UTC

all_usernames wrote: post #224

_emacsomancer_ wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but in many cases the politicians who are statistically able to win office are about as likely to do something meaningful (and not just symbolic) about these issues as the tech billionaires are.

If the ~50% of Americans who choose not to vote, actually did, that would by definition change the politicians who are "able to win."

Something I heard a long time ago is they basically 'are' voting. The vote is they do not care. I personally think it is a bad position to take, but it is not 'wrong'.