41–50 of 101 posts
You are passionate about a "catastrophe" that doesn't exist: https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2020/6/29/on-beha...
You are passionate about a "catastrophe" that doesn't exist: https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2020/6/29/on-beha...
This question pops up quite regularly on HN. I am always giving the same answer. We, HN crowd, presented with a problem tend to reach for a technical solution. Unfortunately, climate change is not an engineering problem, it's a political problem. IT will not solve it. The best we, as engineers, can do is the same as for anyone else - step out of our comport zone and join a climate movement. Extinction Rebellion is my…
I would argue the opposite, that its mainly a technical problem that has been coopted by a political movement. The technical problem should be (roughly), how can we continue to enjoy our lives and the standard of living we have achieved, and continue to bring more of the world to that level, in a way that is sustainable long term. There are lots of promising routes to making this happen, and we have already seen lots…
Your standard of living relies on exploiting amounts of energy equivalent to several hundred slaves per person. That amount of energy can't be found in renewable sources only.
How much of a slave master am I? https://jancovici.com/en/energy-transition/energy-and-us/how...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We already have the solution: nuclear power. The rest is the political problem of the anti-science attitude of one party in the US being spread to the rest of the world.
What is the latest development on nuclear power? I tried to read about these recently, but maybe can you point me in the right direction?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not gonna happen. This is a popular idea, I think people are a bit deluded by the fact that Wind+Solar got so cheap. Don't get me wrong: This is great. We'll likely be able to get rid of fossil-based electricity simply due to costs (even though it's too slow). But it's simply not plausible that you will find a cheaper technology in every area. Finding a way to fly a plane without carbon emissions is a challenge to be…
Thats why there is a need for a global Carbon Tax/Pricing System. This would internalise the cost of pollution and make engineering solution more important from a market perspective.
They link to this website with a few general options: http://worrydream.com/ClimateChange/
For more traditional jobs, I would look at:
- startups developing and marketing greener tech. (Tesla, Sonnen [1])
- publicly funded research organizations (Fraunhofer [2], MPG, universities)
- Established companies that are heavy polluters, but investing in becoming greener: Automotive [3], Energy sector, Concrete
[1] https://jobs.sonnen.de/job/Wildpoldsried-IT-Systemadministra...
[2] https://recruiting.fraunhofer.de/Vacancies/56493/Description...
[3] https://www.bosch.de/karriere/job/REF92958E-softwareentwickl...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not gonna happen. This is a popular idea, I think people are a bit deluded by the fact that Wind+Solar got so cheap. Don't get me wrong: This is great. We'll likely be able to get rid of fossil-based electricity simply due to costs (even though it's too slow). But it's simply not plausible that you will find a cheaper technology in every area. Finding a way to fly a plane without carbon emissions is a challenge to be…
It doesn't need to happen in every area. It just needs to happen in enough areas that the carbon output is brought below a threshold that the environment can safely absorb. Sure, maybe you can't make efficient electric planes. But maybe you can replace 90% of short range flights with trains and make electric planes unnecessary.
That is actually a misconception. There is no such threshold, at least not for carbon dioxide (it's a bit more complicated for methane and some other greenhouse gases). It accumulates in the atmosphere.
There is some uptake of co2 by natural processes, but that's roughly relative to the amount you put in. If you put in more co2 the concentration of co2 in the atmosphere will keep growing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the latest development on nuclear power? I tried to read about these recently, but maybe can you point me in the right direction?
Small reactors, they remove the main problem with nuclear power: huge reactors that no western country knows how to build any more. The largest projects we can build today are the size of a large office building. Anything bigger will be over budget and time.
This question pops up quite regularly on HN. I am always giving the same answer. We, HN crowd, presented with a problem tend to reach for a technical solution. Unfortunately, climate change is not an engineering problem, it's a political problem. IT will not solve it. The best we, as engineers, can do is the same as for anyone else - step out of our comport zone and join a climate movement. Extinction Rebellion is my…
I would argue the opposite, that its mainly a technical problem that has been coopted by a political movement. The technical problem should be (roughly), how can we continue to enjoy our lives and the standard of living we have achieved, and continue to bring more of the world to that level, in a way that is sustainable long term. There are lots of promising routes to making this happen, and we have already seen lots…
This question pops up quite regularly on HN. I am always giving the same answer. We, HN crowd, presented with a problem tend to reach for a technical solution. Unfortunately, climate change is not an engineering problem, it's a political problem. IT will not solve it. The best we, as engineers, can do is the same as for anyone else - step out of our comport zone and join a climate movement. Extinction Rebellion is my…