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

US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 224 posts

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#211

Post by aww_dang »

polotics wrote: post #210
aww_dang wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem a bit hypocritical the poster's part if we assume he used the worst possible energy source. AC is a comfort and luxury. If we assume that climate apocalypse is impending, then going without a few comforts would seem reasonable. >there's no political will or consensus to combat climate change; it's also not a one nation issue. Think about this in the context of the warmist's proposals for limiting energy…

So now there are "warmists" who obviously target the developing world with their misplaced ire? Interesting. I guess the good thing with a strawman is it burns easily, right?

Preventing the developing world from accessing cheap energy will hinder development.

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#212

Post by ars »

iso1631 wrote: post #190
syops wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious why you ask this question. Does the answer matter or in some way lead to a broader point? If so what is that point? Assume it’s the worst possible energy source as far as you are concerned. Then what is your response?

The irony of as we have more hot days, more AC is used, using more kWh, generating more CO2, leading to more hot days. There's also the OPs complaint that he has no agency in this - but he chooses to have AC. I wonder how many tons of CO2 are emitted so people in offices can wear suits and jackets and work through the day, rather than shorts and t-shirts and siesta in the cool.

But don't forget that there's less heating in the winter.

I suspect that because humans live in all sorts of temperature zones the combination of the two basically makes it a wash energy wise.

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#213

Post by syops »

flavius29663 wrote: post #205
syops wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fallacy to which you alluded is actually the fallacy of the false appeal to authority. It is not an argumentative fallacy to appeal to the knowledge of experts in their area of expertise. A large majority of everything you believe to be true has not been independently verified by yourself. You have and continue to rely on the knowledge of others. The 97% I alluded to is not what you claim it to mean. https://clim…

it is a fallacy to appeal to authority (97%) for anything other than "humans do cause global warming". Look at your link on NASA's page, the statements from societies are something like this: > The Earth’s climate is changing in response to increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and particulate matter in the atmosphere, largely as the result of human activities. Which is what the 97% covers, maybe a bit…

If you read my posts you’ll see that I addressed gravity, weather events and policy.

The claim I make is that it is not an argumentative fallacy to appeal to the advice and knowledge of a large majority of experts in their area of expertise. For instance, note that I don’t appeal to climate scientists for advice on how best to implement policies to reduce CO2 since they aren’t policy experts. It is reasonable to appeal to their authority on the necessity of doing this though.

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#214

Post by abystander »

quenix wrote: post #122
chrisco255 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it will now be common" Apparently you haven't been paying attention to all the failed predictions by alarmists over the past 3 decades including: The End of Snow (2000) https://www.climatedepot.com/2018/01/04/flashback-2000-snowf... The predictions of Glacier National Park being ice free by 2020: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-202... Not only is it extremely, extremely unlikely that 2C warm…

The first website you cite, Climate Depot, is severely biased toward right-wing anti climate science agendas, and has been classified as "conspiracy-pseudoscience" by Media Bias/Fact Check. They further comment that "Overall, we rate the Climate Depot a strong Pseudoscience source based on the promotion of human-influenced climate denialism propaganda and the use of poor sources who have failed numerous fact checks."…

> I don't particularly care for the opinion of one lone man.

Same thing happened with Galileo - I'm not saying anti-climate change perspectives are tantamount to Galileo, but it's precisely that line of thinking that marginalized and abused countless (correct) counter-orthodox scientific arguments.

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#215

Post by rasz »

sgpl wrote: post #39

I've been cranking up my AC and adding ice to my water to combat the heat but I recently read an article about sea-life [0] boiling to death in their natural habitats (oceans, seas) which made me realize that animals in the wild increasingly don't have this option. It made me really sad to think about the fact that we'll probably see mass-extinction events (for animals, etc.) in the near future or at least within my…

I imagine a couple of news stories like https://horizon.fandom.com/wiki/Banda_Sea_Incident in my life time:

Horizon Zero Dawn game> "Another problem to add to our big steaming pile. Apparently a fisherman in the Banda Sea captured video of a Hartz-Timor Horus unit refueling via biomatter conversion along the shoreline of Pulau Wetar. On a pod of endangered dolphins, no less, quite possibly the last of their kind. Not to get graphic, but it looks like what happens inside a blender, as if the robot was whipping up a big pink swirling milkshake of dolphin chum. Our suppression team has scrubbed it from 43 networks, but it's still propagating, so it's only a matter of time before it goes viral. A prepared statement feels grossly insufficient. Any suggestions? This one's a real stinker."

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#216

Post by nobody9999 »

bboylen wrote: post #137
nobody9999 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People don't want the new normal to be like in California and New York where rolling blackouts are the norm due to unreliable green energy Huh? I live in New York and we've never had "rolling blackouts." I can't speak to California, but in New York, no power failures due to "green energy" have ever happened here. The few (half a dozen in the past 55 years or so) significant power outages here in New York have been d…

https://pix11.com/news/local-news/power-outages-new-york-new... https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/30/nyregion/nyc-energy-alert... I don't mean to blame green energy for the grid not being able to handle the recent heat wave. But I do blame the closing of the Indian Point Nuclear power plant. Nuclear is a fantastic source of carbon neutral energy but plants are being shut down in both New York and California, without al…

From your first link:

>Con Edison urged customers across New York City and Westchester to conserve energy as much as possible, in an effort to avoid further outages due to equipment failure.

I can't speak to California as I don't live there, but your original statement about rolling blackouts in New York was flat wrong.

The recent issue in New York during the heat wave was about aging infrastructure and equipment failures, not "green energy" or the closure of Indian Point.

That might change in the future, but your statement that New York experiences "rolling blackouts" is just false.

In fact, there have never been rolling blackouts in New York. Ever.

I wholeheartedly agree that nuclear should be part of the mix and that in the absence of viable grid energy storage, solar and wind energy can't provide base load[0] power generation.

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#217

Post by RickJWagner »

If covid didn't make a dent in global warming, then I don't think there's much hope.

Nearly everything shut down, commuting stopped, people worked from home, etc. etc. It's hard to imagine any sort of voluntary program that would bring bigger behavioral shifts.

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#218

Post by Sebb767 »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #181
Sebb767 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For the very wealthy it’s simple greed. It's greed for basically anyone above the poverty line. There's functionally no difference for wanting a better life for you and your children and to increase your wealth for what is, in the end, the same goal. Unnecessarily driving an SUV, eating far too much meat and running the lines supplying peoples with those meat is morally not that different.

> Unnecessarily driving an SUV, eating far too much meat and running the lines supplying peoples with those meat is morally not that different. At the very least it's a difference in degree. If we use wealth as a proxy for power then a given billionaire has at least the same political power as 10K median Americans. And of course the median American has expenses which constitute a much larger share of his income than…

The supply chain is a symptom, not the disease. Our hypothetical billionaire could close down (or increase prices, for the same effect), but his piece would either be grabbed by another ruthless business man wanting to be a billionaire or simply merged with the existing competitors. Unless you make people change their lifestyle, closing carbon-intensive production lines is just playing whack-a-mole. So, in reality, he really has not that much more power than you.

And yes, you as a consumer can make a large difference. You can choose to not eat meat, not drive a car, buy your clothes from eco-friendly shops and dedicate your life to make a change. It's just not as convenient as saying 'rich man bad'. People who try can change the world - see beyond meat and Tesla for success stories. Not doing so, but instead chasing a life of personal wealth and well-being is, simply stated, greed. With different amounts of money involved, sure, but the exact same greed. People starving in Africa do not have a choice, yes - but we do. We just choose to blame 'better connected' people because it's easy.

I fully agree with you, however, that lobbying for the wrong thing is definitely bad and something that can be done far more effectively by billionaires. Still, it does not absolve you from your own failures.

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#219

Post by Sebb767 »

ziml77 wrote: post #166
Sebb767 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. Plus some perceived unfairness because people who do not care about the environment have an advantage over you and also a better lifestyle.

People are afraid that this unfairness will leave them without money. There's a thought that if the US has laws to limit altering the climate, China (ever the bogeyman) will continue to pollute and have a crushing economic advantage because of it.

To be fair, it's not totally unfounded. It's just that going as-is will lead to a worse outcome for everyone in the long run. Perfect example of the tragedy of the commons.

Re: US-Canada heatwave 'virtually impossible' without warming

#220

Post by throwaway894345 »

Sebb767 wrote: post #218
throwaway894345 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unnecessarily driving an SUV, eating far too much meat and running the lines supplying peoples with those meat is morally not that different. At the very least it's a difference in degree. If we use wealth as a proxy for power then a given billionaire has at least the same political power as 10K median Americans. And of course the median American has expenses which constitute a much larger share of his income than…

The supply chain is a symptom, not the disease. Our hypothetical billionaire could close down (or increase prices, for the same effect), but his piece would either be grabbed by another ruthless business man wanting to be a billionaire or simply merged with the existing competitors. Unless you make people change their lifestyle, closing carbon-intensive production lines is just playing whack-a-mole. So, in reality, h…

> The supply chain is a symptom, not the disease. Our hypothetical billionaire could close down (or increase prices, for the same effect), but his piece would either be grabbed by another ruthless business man wanting to be a billionaire or simply merged with the existing competitors. Unless you make people change their lifestyle, closing carbon-intensive production lines is just playing whack-a-mole. So, in reality, he really has not that much more power than you.

That might be true if votes weren't for sale (lobbying, campaign contributions, etc), but they are and thus political power is proportional to wealth. Our hypothetical billionaire can advocate to preserve policies that allow him to profit by polluting the environment, which is to say plundering society (in that the environment is a shared resource--it belongs to all of society).

To use your metaphor, the disease is that there isn't a mechanism to decouple political power from wealth.

Post reply on HN