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

U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 368 posts

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#301

Post by sitkack »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #228
abyssin wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next step is to reduce energy consumption. It's so obvious I wonder why it isn't talked about more. I'm not saying it's easy. We either choose to reduce energy consumption, or the consequences of climate change will force us to do it. The difference is in the first case, we have more control over it, and it might cause less human suffering.

Because our energy consumption is ultimately tied to the exponential growth of the economy. Even if everything around us would become 10x more efficient - which already would require many scientific breakthroughs - that's just multiplying the exponential growth curve by a constant factor of 0.1. A little bit of relief, but it fundamentally doesn't change anything. And that's ignoring the reality that if you make some…

> Because our energy consumption is ultimately tied to the exponential growth of the economy.

We need to get off this exponential! Any modification of Capitalism is painted as an attack on basic human freedoms so that the rich can go down with the ship, rather than pass it on for the rest of humanity and the world.

How do we change what we optimize for? Because it currently isn't working.

> 10x efficient, it tends to become used more

https://simplicable.com/new/jevons-paradox

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#302

Post by libraryatnight »

bamboozled wrote: post #64

I hope I’m wrong but it seems the world may have to leave the United States in the 1950s where it currently plans to reside. Seriously, it’s time counties who want to improve the situation need move on from worrying about what the United sates is doing because it doesn’t look like much will be happening for a long time.

Americans are about to start learning what it's like trying to emigrate to other countries for a better life.

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#303

Post by benhurmarcel »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #294
originalvichy wrote: post #3

As a European this is the main fear I have during this election. 4 more years of inaction from the government of one of the biggest polluters in the world will really bite us in the ass. Not that I’m super proud of how we are doing in my country, but it can’t get worse.

As a European living in the US I think it’s time for Europe to stop looking at the US and start leading. If you are worried about climate change, there is plenty of stuff that can be done in Europe without the US. Europe could also take a strong lead in developing green technologies. Stop worrying about the US and stand on your own feet!

Europe already does a lot more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di...

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#304

Post by La1n »

hackerNoose wrote: post #203
Sharlin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China and the EU can, and should. "Polluter pays" should become the standard policy in international trade in numerous other ways, too.

China is the biggest polluter and they plan to increase their co2 emissions to at least 2030 so I don't think you'll find an ally there.

Big polluter because it's a giant country. Per capita it's quite low, and there is no reason a big country should be punished why a smaller country that does significantly worse shouldn't. According to that logic if they would split into lots of smaller countries it suddenly isn't an issue anymore.

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#305

Post by CapriciousCptl »

ceejayoz wrote: post #295
CapriciousCptl wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to imagine anyone would keep working for that $400,001th dollar if they only got to keep 16 cents of it. Surgeons, for instance, can literally stop taking patients and go to Aruba when they get near the bend. High-dual income households is another example-- imagine a double-physician household where one of them is taxed at 84%-- they'd save money by one of them not working at all considering daycare expense…

I would very happily take 16% of an extra $1B.

Do any US taxpayers earn $1 billion annually?

Even if you use a more realistic number and want to focus on the top 0.0000003%, that's very different than taxing people who earn income as a linear function of their hours worked.

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#306

Post by La1n »

perryizgr8 wrote: post #170
astura wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like that because unlike most states, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania didn't start counting their mail-in votes until after in person votes. Mail in votes will almost certainly heavily skew blue and there's substantial numbers of them this year. Not saying Biden will definitely win, just we can't tell yet. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/04/whats-behind-trumps-leads-in...

> Mail in votes will almost certainly heavily skew blue. Is there a good explanation for that assertion? I've seen it being said in many places but never any reason for it. Why would mail in votes skew in a particular direction?

>Is there a good explanation for that assertion?

I think part of the explanation is that Republicans tend to feel less threatened by covid-19 and thus more willing to vote in person.

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#307

Post by La1n »

giantg2 wrote: post #52
legulere wrote: post #2

So much opportunity wasted considering China would do more if the US also did more.

I highly doubt that. As others have said, China has no plans to reduce pollution until 2030 (negotiated at the accord) and is currently increasing their polluting infrastructure.

Chinese Co2 emission seem to have flattened quite a lot in the last 6 years.

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#308

Post by 7thaccount »

Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #296
7thaccount wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it would be unpopular, but it's what the US has been pushing towards for a long time with deregulation and it's the dream of the economists as the prices should be more transparent and optimal.

In my country we already have a system where the price of electricity fluctuates hourly depending on supply and demand. The result for individuals: many people just subscribe to a flat rate from the electricity companies to avoid the uncertainty and pay the same predictable price each month (but of course, this predictable price comes at a significant markup with respect to the "free market" price). The rest of us go…

Interesting comment. Thank you! Does anyone have an automated system in place that would automatically curtail yourself when price gets above X at Y time?

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#309

Post by tw04 »

pg_bot wrote: post #277
tw04 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fracking boom has released massive amounts of methane into the atmosphere so we basically went from something we actively track (coal emissions) to something we don't track and thus aren't regulating or controlling (methane leaking from fracking wells). This is a net negative for planet earth... That didn't reduce emissions and may have actually increased them.

We do track methane in the atmosphere, that is NOAA's job. Methane in the atmosphere tripled from preindustrial times to 1995 and has started to level off since then. It doesn't look like fracking has lead to a dramatic increase in the release of methane in the atmosphere. https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/carbontracker-ch4/

Leveled off? It's at record highs and has continued to increase every single year, it hasn't leveled off at all: https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/12/1561/2020/

The NOAA tracking global methane has literally nothing to do with tracking methane output from individual wells - which again, we don't do. Moving the goal posts doesn't make you right. We DO actively track emissions from coal fired plants. We DO know that fracking has absolutely increased methane emissions:

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/08/frack...

https://www.pnas.org/content/112/51/15597.abstract

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab9ed2

Re: U.S. Exits Paris Climate Accord

#310

Post by agumonkey »

macspoofing wrote: post #145
originalvichy wrote: post #3

As a European this is the main fear I have during this election. 4 more years of inaction from the government of one of the biggest polluters in the world will really bite us in the ass. Not that I’m super proud of how we are doing in my country, but it can’t get worse.

>4 more years of inaction from the government of one of the biggest polluters in the world will really bite us in the ass. But that's not the case. America is reducing its emissions greatly by shifting from coal to natural gas (which mirrors what Germany is doing, for example). Coal is ostensibly dead in US. If you look at the charts from Wikipedia [1][2], you'll see the US has cut emissions at about the same rate (o…

How plausible is the electric truck migration ? I've seen the marketing but I don't know if companies are actually going for it.
Post reply on HN