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

Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 441 posts

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#131

Post by qbasic_forever »

stoolpigeon wrote: post #98
qbasic_forever wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let the nuclear powers build the reactors and design the ships to slide them in like big batteries then IMHO. There can't be more than a few thousand cargo ships in the world--it's a risk that could be managed.

I've only observed it from the outside (I worked on an aircraft carrier - but nothing to do with the power plants) but what I observed is that it takes a lot of people that get payed a lot of money in the private sector to safely operate and maintain reactors. I'm guessing that the building costs would be dwarfed by the long term cost of manning nuclear ships.

Interesting challenge for us then--if we're pouring money into self-driving cars and constantly making strides there, why can't we do the same for fully automated self-running nuclear reactors. If there's a future where we trust cars 100% to drive every family safely around town, we should be able to trust reactors to run themselves and fail safe. I don't see why a human brain has to be in the critical loop of reactor operation, other than tradition or legal CYA.

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#132

Post by trutannus »

rchaud wrote: post #101
lazide wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re inundated with folks screaming about danger and hyping up fear from every angle - everything from economic collapse, to stock market crashes, to apocalyptic visions from every angle about climate, etc. And what most people, especially younger folks, don’t realize is that it’s AlWAYS been this way. And most of the time, when something does blow up, there wasn’t a clear or unambiguous difference between the thing…

It has not always been that way. Who were the anti-vax superstars of 1918? And what were the ad-targeting capabilities of newspapers back then?

They were in government at the time: https://www.history.com/news/1918-pandemic-spanish-flu-censo...

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#133

Post by aksss »

jacquesm wrote: post #47
qbasic_forever wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear container ships are such a good idea. It is maddening we haven't done this and only turn war ships into nuclear power.

That's a non-proliferation issue more than anything else.

Is it? Nuclear powered warships aren't as common as people think. There are only 12 nuclear powered carriers in the World and the US has 11 of them. I think if it were a no-brainer and "easy" (to install, maintain, safely operate) on container ships, it would be done by now. Or at very least you'd see more carriers operated by countries with nuclear capabilities. That the Russians don't operate a nuclear powered carrier says something (not sure what, but I think it indicts the complexity, reliability, etc).

EDIT: For those interested, here is some great reading on the history and state of marine nuclear propulsion. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-nucl...

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#134

Post by aeternum »

jacquesm wrote: post #76
lazide wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re inundated with folks screaming about danger and hyping up fear from every angle - everything from economic collapse, to stock market crashes, to apocalyptic visions from every angle about climate, etc. And what most people, especially younger folks, don’t realize is that it’s AlWAYS been this way. And most of the time, when something does blow up, there wasn’t a clear or unambiguous difference between the thing…

Yes, it's the boy who cried wolf on a planet wide scale. But it just so happens that this planet is the only planet we've got and we're doing a piss-poor job of stewardship. Regardless of alarmists that much at least should be obvious to anybody with a normal IQ and up. But it's so convenient to ignore it all and get on with the hunt for that extra buck.

It's not necessarily obvious. Planetary weather is a chaotic system and even for somewhat stable phenomenon like the gulf stream it's not a question of if it will collapse but when. Humans are likely speeding up the collapse but it will eventually happen regardless.

If I had to choose between technological progress and stewardship, I'd pick technological progress because that's our only real chance at long-term survival. We should really attempt to do both and better align the hunt for that extra buck with both tech progress and stewardship (ahem carbon tax) rather than demonizing it.

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#135

Post by nodejs_rulez_1 »

deanCommie wrote: post #10

Before someone makes the inevitable joke, no this will not help offset climate change temperature gains and neutralize the risk of heat-waves. The summer temperatures will continue to get hotter. It's the winter temperatures that will get colder. Both require energy use to keep housing liveable. Which, unless we dramatically transition our energy generation to renewables, will just continue exacerbating the climate p…

I did not know Gulf stream stops being a warm stream in summer, what an interesting phenomenon.

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#136

Post by mhh__ »

failuser wrote: post #69
jacquesm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can kiss Northern Europe as a habitable area goodbye. So yes, it matters quite a bit.

Northwest Russia is habitable. Not that pleasant, but habitable.

Northern Europe doesn't have ownership of Southern Europe, so they may not be comparable in the sense that habitability is somewhat subjective in the age of modern logistics.

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#137

Post by roter »

ghastmaster wrote: post #55

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream > The warm water and temperature contrast along the edge of the Gulf Stream often increase the intensity of cyclones, tropical or otherwise. There should be less quantity and intensity of storms in the Atlantic, in the event this takes place.

Not necessarily. The AMOC transports heat poleward in order to balance the net surplus of solar radiation in the tropics and net deficit radiational cooling at the poles. Lessening this pathway may mean other pathways may need to increase to compensate: like storms in the atmosphere.

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#138

Post by BeFlatXIII »

jacquesm wrote: post #67
konschubert wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we used paper straws, isn’t that enough? In al seriousness, the next generation isn’t going to be all that different than the last 10000 generations of mankind.

They could very well be different than all of the preceding ones in the sense that there could be less of them than the preceding generation which is something that hasn't happened since mankind started to reproduce in earnest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population#Past_populati... Famines, pandemics and wars are mere speed bumps compared to the kind of impact this can have. And if not the next generation th…

Homo sapiens is simply not equipped to handle exponential growth when planning for the future. Luckily, it seems that the birth rate slowdown is a global phenomenon and it’s likely that the peak population will be well below three times the current population. We are not deer who have no other option but to reproduce at full capacity until the population collapses.

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#139

Post by jacquesm »

javajosh wrote: post #128
jacquesm wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's the boy who cried wolf on a planet wide scale. But it just so happens that this planet is the only planet we've got and we're doing a piss-poor job of stewardship. Regardless of alarmists that much at least should be obvious to anybody with a normal IQ and up. But it's so convenient to ignore it all and get on with the hunt for that extra buck.

There is something geniuinely unique about this time and place: we're at the middle-end of the greatest golden age in human history. And what we did was give each other a break . Professors gave their students breaks, and judges gave lawyers breaks, parents gave their kids breaks, editors give their journalists breaks, and so on. And what has resulted is a profound erosion of accountability, integrity, and self-restr…

Good points.

> change that, if enough people believe in it, it will happen

I've heard that speech before somewhere...

Re: Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Gulf Stream

#140

Post by dylan604 »

spockz wrote: post #4

So what do we do about this? Increase the salinity? Install huge pumps? (The last thing is only partly in jest.)

Increase the salinity with desalinzation and putting the brine back into the ocean. Solve loss of water and salinity! Boom done! Simple, right?
Post reply on HN