291–300 of 394 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can’t speak for the parent of your post, so I don’t know if the numbers add up, but population of Indonesia alone is 270 million. And the country is spread out amongst many islands. That’s just one country of many.
Indonesia is South East Asia.
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've argued this point before here but I don't believe that will happen by 2050 at all.
For several reasons, not the least of which is there are fossilized reefs from epochs with much much higher C02 levels (and temperatures) then we will see any time in the near future.
I was in Mexico last year. On the reefs. Diving. They were in good shape with lots of young corals and very little die off. Sunscreen and human activity are a threat.
Not getting into the whole debate on warming (I believe something is happening) but this coral die off claim I do not believe at all. Particularly the 30 years bit.
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…
Bill Gates has funded the development of a new nuclear reactor design that is much smaller and safer than current ones and uses the huge current US stockpile of depleted uranium as a fuel source. He was going to build it in China, as the US permitting process is very difficult (impossible?), put that is no longer possible with the current US/China political environment. Environmentalists have been fighting nuclear po…
Given current costs (check the Lazard decks) and likely trends, it's pretty possible that nuclear would lose out to renewables + storage + CO2 capture even with a global carbon tax forcing CO2 neutrality.
I also don't think it helps our cause to cast all opposition to nuclear power as ignorant paranoia. While the impact was thankfully minimal, Fukushima should have never happened in the first place. I personally changed my views on how much we can trust governments to properly regulate this infrastructure as a result.
Basically it's left me hoping that some of the more novel new nuclear concepts work out. I'm definitely cheering for NuScale.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why a tech billionaire? We as humans just need to eat less animal food, and reduce our emissions as low as possible.
We need to start to understand as humankind that we're a pest to other life on this planet, be it animals, plants, naval lifeforms or anything else, us included (maybe except tardigrades, extremophiles and deep-sea creatures). We need to reduce our numbers, and sustain that. Or embrace Musk's ideas.
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…
> 500 million pacific islanders will be forced to flee to Southeast Asia How the heck did you come up with this number? The entire population of Oceania excluding Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea is 3 million.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Currently fish farming is often just fish recycling. Conversion of lower quality feed fish into higher quality market fish.
The most depressing part is the feed fish are often healthier for you than the farmed fish. We go through this whole process and the result is half as much fish as we started with, and it's worse for you.
Salmon farming, for example, can be incredibly efficient - Norwegian salmon farms typically get 1 kg of fish for every 1.15-1.2kg of feed. That's an amazing conversion factor.
That said, there are serious welfare concerns with fish farming. Even in Norway, which has some of the highest standards in the world, sea lice are a huge problem, and the mechanical and chemical treatments used are horrible. Another issue is the welfare of "cleaner fish", which are places in cages to eat lice from salmon - AFAIK there are still no regulations around their welfare, and mortality rates are shocking[0]
https://sciencenorway.no/animal-welfare-fish-farming-salmon-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I sympathize with what you're saying, because I also agree that voters should make informed choices, and never vote for any politician representing the status quo. Unfortunately, the US and rest of the world have to move through a process. Think of it like addiction: we are still in the denial stage. We haven't hit rock bottom yet, but unfortunately when we do, it will be too late. Most species will be extinct and we…
>This was all planned I generally agree with you on a lot of points, but I felt that this unsubstantiated portion took a lot away from the other parts.
If we use Hanlon's razor and attribute the rich and powerful's incompetence on this issue to stupidity instead of malice, then forgive me if I don't find that comforting.
Everyone please stop blaming coral bleaching on climate change. Nitrogen run-off from farming is the main cause. We need to reduce nitrogen enrichment in farming, which will lead to lower yields and lower profits (or, more likely, higher prices). But blaming climate change here is an egregious example of green washing which will prevent or delay resolving the real issue. Stop it. Please. "Anthropogenic nutrient enric…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people would disown their own children before they stop eating meat.
This is a remarkable statement. If everyone would just cut down on meat, even avoid it a few days of the week, it would make an enormous positive impact. Same goes for seafood. From the perspective of someone who eats meat twice a week or so, it's absurd to hear people say they couldn't do it. Yeah, they could. Of course, with governments subsidizing the hell out of the meat industry those $0.99 McDonalds specials wi…
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."