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

211–220 of 441 posts

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

#211

Post by minikites »

jlos wrote: post #177
jacquesm wrote: post #32

After seeing the global chaotic response to COVID I'm convinced that climate change will not receive a meaningful response until it is way too late. It apparently needs to hit the majority of the planet right in the gut (and then preferably the wealthy part) for people to get off their collective asses and do something about it. I'm just about ready to pack it in and hope the next generation is smarter than this one…

There is simply no simple way to address Climate Change like there was with CFC's in the 90s. - 1/3 of emissions come China which has an autocratic leadership accountable neither to its people or the global community. - 70% of emissions come from energy consumption. 35% of all emissions is electricity and heat, and another 15% is construction + manufacturing. - Even if every mode of transportation was fully electric…

>1/3 of emissions come China which has an autocratic leadership accountable neither to its people or the global community.

China is doing proportionally more to combat climate change than we are.

>70% of emissions come from energy consumption. 35% of all emissions is electricity and heat

There are so many "easy wins" here. Better insulation and other end user improvements (e.g. heat pumps), stricter efficiency standards and mandates, carbon taxes on the most polluting industries and generation methods (i.e. make it unprofitable to restart an old coal power plant to mine bitcoin), etc.

>I'm not suggesting to do nothing, but a smug mentality of "people are just not willing to do the obviously right solution because they are stupid" doesn't solve anything either.

There's not an obviously right solution to everything, but there are obviously right solutions to many things, and we are still choosing not to do any of them.

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

#212

Post by felgueres »

Solutions to climate change are not behavioral as some suggest here.

It’s about incentives.

Transitioning to carbon neutral energy is possible at the expense of businesses’ cost structure, ie. less competitive.

Same applies to building retrofitting, agriculture and other major carbon emitters.

There is no serious conversation about climate change without looking at nuclear energy; it is base load generation (24/7), cheap and carbon neutral.

Bipartisan federal mandates to scale nuclear energy is the only real solution to this problem.

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

#213

Post by Robotbeat »

draugadrotten wrote: post #187
Robotbeat wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don’t really have that time. Solar and wind can be built out faster. But we should do new nuclear on the margins and preserve/enhance existing nuclear. Battery-electric (and liquid hydrogen) for container ships works. If someone really tried.

> Solar and wind can be built out faster The sheer number of wind power plants that is required to replace a single nuclear reactor has significant impact on nature, wild birds and more. One wind power plant isn't much but what happens to wildlife when you need to place 2000 of them? For one reactor, that is. https://www.ans.org/news/article-933/wind-nuclear-infographi...

Yeah, you need a lot, but the impact isn’t great if you take appropriate precautions. Also, solar photovoltaic doesn’t have that problem.

Again, I’m actually very pro-nuclear but I don’t think we should put all our eggs in the nuclear basket.

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

#214

Post by jbay808 »

geocrasher wrote: post #107
jacquesm wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that is heavily sensationalized. But a new 'small ice age' as a result of the gulfstream shutting down is a serious possibility, even if it changed direction that would already cause serious problems for very large parts of Europe.

Sensationalized? Sure. Hollywood. But incorrect? It's hard to know.

Well, they forgot to account for adiabatic heating of that cold air getting pulled out of the upper atmosphere, which would have made it quite hot when it hit the ground. If I recall, that cold air was the central threat in the movie.

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

#215

Post by emn13 »

Permit wrote: post #173
emn13 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter. If prices rise gradually, people will adapt. Remote villages might become ghost towns (hardly the first time in Canada, incidentally), or become more isolated. And the world isn't going to turn into some utopian egalitarian place either, so the hard reality is that many people won't lose anything by losing air travel, because they already do none, and thus those that have that luxurious habit now w…

> If prices rise gradually, people will adapt. I think this is where you and I disagree. I would contend that the average citizen will resist this. I am basing this off what we saw in France when they introduced a very modest fuel tax. I think this is an issue that would actually unite both the left and the right. I suspect that if we made air travel, meat and fresh (flown-in) produce only available to the wealthiest…

So first of all - France is known for it's remarkable protest culture. That's not typical. Secondly, the fuel tax in question, while reasonable and necessary, is also a somewhat special case even in France because it represents taking away peoples everyday mobility. As cars electrify, that will be less so, and other measures - such as those targeting luxury travel like air travel - would surely not see quite the same levels of protest. And at this point, because the protests were widespread, and because they succeeded, there is going to be vigilance against sneaky plans by the government to pass it while nobody is watching - but that too is a fairly local issue.

I expect that even in France those tax hikes will eventually pass, even if it takes longer than elsewhere and much longer than other measures. It may need some other compromise, like a comparable tax-reduction for median incomes; and some level of political maneuvering to placate the particularly hard hit. Or perhaps they'll try to achieve similar reductions via other measures such as speed limits and regulations on cars. But I don't think it's representative of social upheaval vs. climate-change cost in general, anyhow.

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

#216

Post by yongjik »

MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #184
jacquesm wrote: post #32

After seeing the global chaotic response to COVID I'm convinced that climate change will not receive a meaningful response until it is way too late. It apparently needs to hit the majority of the planet right in the gut (and then preferably the wealthy part) for people to get off their collective asses and do something about it. I'm just about ready to pack it in and hope the next generation is smarter than this one…

Sadly, we might not see meaningful action until we have a "Climate 911" moment; a single event in a wealthy location where thousands of people perish within a short period of time.

600K Americans died from Covid, yet even now, it's not exactly hard to find people saying that the real danger was emergency government responses we met along the way.

The tricky thing about "Climate moment" is that it's impossible to prove that any single disaster was caused by climate change, because it's statistical in nature. A super-hurricane could ravage Florida or Texas, and you will always find someone saying "You can't prove it's global warming - freak weathers do happen all the time! Now is not the time to be carried away by knee-jerk emotions!"

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

#217

Post by inetknght »

lettergram wrote: post #61
matttproud wrote: post #5

Makes me look back at the last 20-30 years of discourse in the United States and let out a deep sigh. Had CFC propellants emerged today, I highly doubt the U.S. would have been a signatory to the Montreal Protocol — just to own the libs or avoid hindering the market by a boogeyman of 0.0001% overhead or some other form of contrarian political identity differentiation.

I’m frankly less concerned about climate change - in reality we don’t have enough data for super definitive answers. Further, we can and the world can fairly easily adapt. A few degrees over a hundred years is easily manageable. In contrast, insect populations are dropping like a stone. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_in_insect_population... We’re going to have serious problems within the next 5-10 years if t…

> We’re going to have serious problems within the next 5-10 years

I'm having trouble reconciling your statement there with your first one:

> I’m frankly less concerned about climate change - in reality we don’t have enough data for super definitive answers. Further, we can and the world can fairly easily adapt. A few degrees over a hundred years is easily manageable.

So let me understand:

1. You think that insect population decline isn't related to climate change.

Okay I can buy that. Humans have built a lot of roads and vehicles emit a lot of pollutants and pollutants kill insects. So what do you propose to do to solve that? Or do you think it's a different problem? Perhaps climate change is a contributing factor.

2. You think we have declining water availability.

Indeed, we do. Many states have had more severe and more prolonged droughts that previously recorded. But, on the flip side, some states are getting inundated with more rain than ever before. It's almost as if the climate is changing. So anyway, how do you propose to solve the water availability problems?

3. Solar weather could wipe out all electronics.

Yeah that's a tough one. It sure would be unfortunate if our planet's magnetic shield stopped working one day. But on the flip side there's not much we could do about it. So why worry? There's other things to worry about like climate change and the insect apocalypse.

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

#218

Post by vimy »

Ekaros wrote: post #165
vimy wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, the plastic replacements often cause more emissions. Because of production or because more trucks are needed for the same products with thicker packaging. Supermarket chain in my country changed their packaging, the same amount now needs 2 trucks instead of one. Also glass bottles or cardboard are heavier so more fuel consumption.

Reusable "bamboo" cups are a fun example. I'm not sure if they are considered biodegradable anymore and then the fact that some countries in Europe had them remove from market... Due potentially leaching melamine and formaldehyde... So I take it will take awhile for us to get these things right...

The solution would be to keep using plastic and set up garbage collection infrastructure in the countries who spill all the garbage in the ocean.

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

#219

Post by l33t2328 »

yongjik wrote: post #216
MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, we might not see meaningful action until we have a "Climate 911" moment; a single event in a wealthy location where thousands of people perish within a short period of time.

600K Americans died from Covid, yet even now, it's not exactly hard to find people saying that the real danger was emergency government responses we met along the way. The tricky thing about "Climate moment" is that it's impossible to prove that any single disaster was caused by climate change, because it's statistical in nature. A super-hurricane could ravage Florida or Texas, and you will always find someone saying…

Those people were mostly old and infirm, not exactly the groups with the most political say.

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

#220

Post by sokoloff »

minikites wrote: post #211
jlos wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is simply no simple way to address Climate Change like there was with CFC's in the 90s. - 1/3 of emissions come China which has an autocratic leadership accountable neither to its people or the global community. - 70% of emissions come from energy consumption. 35% of all emissions is electricity and heat, and another 15% is construction + manufacturing. - Even if every mode of transportation was fully electric…

>1/3 of emissions come China which has an autocratic leadership accountable neither to its people or the global community. China is doing proportionally more to combat climate change than we are. >70% of emissions come from energy consumption. 35% of all emissions is electricity and heat There are so many "easy wins" here. Better insulation and other end user improvements (e.g. heat pumps), stricter efficiency standa…

In many cases, people are not willing to do the theoretically/physically best/most energy efficient solution because it’s much, much cheaper to not.

My house is ~100 years old structural brick. The insulation on most of the vertical walls is just the plaster, air gap, and 9” of brick. As we remodel (very slowly), we insulate with spray foam, but that remodeling is never driven by energy concerns. It’s vastly cheaper for me to keep heating the bulk of the house with natural gas than it ever would be to take money from investments and turn them into insulation and new plaster walls.

I’ve had insulation and HVAC contractors out. To totally redo just the vertical walls and change the HVAC to locally electric is a six-figure proposition and by the time it’s done, the first digit won’t be a “1”. The payback period on that is infinite if you charge yourself 2% interest (with energy priced as it is today).

Post reply on HN