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

241–250 of 441 posts

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

#241

Post by dntrkv »

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.

The US generates 2x more emissions per capita (15.5 vs 7 tons). Australia generates more than the US (17), and Canada even more than Australia (18.5).

We got plenty of work to do ourselves before we look to China.

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

#242

Post by Overton-Window »

dntrkv wrote: post #241
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. The US generates 2x more emissions per capita (15.5 vs 7 tons). Australia generates more than the US (17), and Canada even more than Australia (18.5). We got plenty of work to do ourselves before we look to China.

Per capita figures are meaningless. You're discussing imaginary lines in the dirt. The only way to tackle climate change is to bring down global emissions.

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

#243

Post by tablespoon »

handrous wrote: post #239
tablespoon wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The craziness with the GOP started more recently (post-1990s). IIRC, you can date that phase to 1994 and Newt Gingrich. Though that was maybe more like phase II, with phase I starting in ~1980 with Reagan.

Yep. The late 70s and early 80s mark the beginning of several strategies, policies, and chess moves that paid off big time in the 90s. The neoliberal movement gained a major presence in the Republican Party at the beginning of that span, and by the early 90s it had also captured the Democrats. The Fairness Doctrine fell, and its absence was quickly exploited. The ball took a while to get rolling, but was moving fast…

> Economic libertarianism saw some important activity near the beginning of that span, and its very confident anti-government and laissez-faire positions and language became very influential through the 90s, and it continues to grow.

That's true, but I'd quibble with the "it continues to grow" part. IMHO, it's peaked. It's still strong, but Trump and other populists dealt it a blow; and it's arguably now sclerotic "old thing" instead of the buzzy "new thing."

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

#244

Post by timeon »

slownews45 wrote: post #221
beebmam wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's important to remember that plastic waste is virtually unrelated to climate change. They both might be "green" issues, but plastic straws in our oceans aren't going to have any significant effect on warming the planet. They'll just end up causing ecological changes/damage. Malicious actors try to conflate the two. Carbon gas emissions pose an existential threat to the future of human society; plastic straws do no…

You don't have to be a malicious actors. The same folks are pushing both issues and will not talk proactively / positively about anything? Carbon capture? Hell no! Micro nuclear? Hell no! Ban straws? Yes!! We did the whole glass bottle use thing for milk etc etc - but at some point you realize some of these high profile enviro actions are basic hot air - we'd be better off with getting rid of them entirely and doing…

> You don't have to be a malicious actors.

But with your nitpicking maybe you are?

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

#245

Post by jay_kyburz »

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…

I agree, humanity is just not equipped to deal with this crisis. We are not organized or disciplined enough. There are too many competing interests and whats worse, the problems are not human scale. (Meaning that people won't see the benefits of their sacrifices in their own lifetimes)

If I were a wealthy silicon valley type guy I would be looking closely at the Biosphere 2 project from the 80s and other closed ecosystem projects. There is untold wealth to be made knowing how to build and manage closed ecosystems, both here on earth and in space. There is a lot of science to do, and a lot of tech to build.

I would not be surprised if there were a number of secret ecosystem projects already underway around the world.

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

#246

Post by jay_kyburz »

Overton-Window wrote: post #242
dntrkv wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1/3 of emissions come China which has an autocratic leadership accountable neither to its people or the global community. The US generates 2x more emissions per capita (15.5 vs 7 tons). Australia generates more than the US (17), and Canada even more than Australia (18.5). We got plenty of work to do ourselves before we look to China.

Per capita figures are meaningless. You're discussing imaginary lines in the dirt. The only way to tackle climate change is to bring down global emissions.

The point he was making, and I agree, is that you can't expect people in China to make sacrifices unless you do first. Lets get our own personal emissions down first, then point the finger at China.

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

#247

Post by octodog »

Overton-Window wrote: post #242
dntrkv wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1/3 of emissions come China which has an autocratic leadership accountable neither to its people or the global community. The US generates 2x more emissions per capita (15.5 vs 7 tons). Australia generates more than the US (17), and Canada even more than Australia (18.5). We got plenty of work to do ourselves before we look to China.

Per capita figures are meaningless. You're discussing imaginary lines in the dirt. The only way to tackle climate change is to bring down global emissions.

Per capita emissions are extremely relevant because it indicates which countries need to implement drastic changes.

The US, Canada and Australia together make up roughly 20% of global emissions with approximately 5% of the global population. Regardless of how you slice it these countries need to take serious action.

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

#248

Post by VintageCool »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #129
cogman10 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their are claims of concerns about carbon emissions, but absolute opposition to any work around nuclear. If carbon emissions was the or a very important issue, you'd be going full out on lots of ideas. While I agree nuclear is the right way to go... it's frankly too late to put all our eggs in that basket. It takes over a decade just to turn on a new plant in the US due to all the regulations. We can work to improv…

> While I agree nuclear is the right way to go... it's frankly too late to put all our eggs in that basket. It takes over a decade just to turn on a new plant in the US due to all the regulations. We can work to improve that situation, but at the end of the day, solar and wind can be deployed much faster and at a lower cost. I've heard this exact same thing said for 20 years. I expect I'll be hearing it for another 2…

You will be continuing to hear about wind and solar for the next 20 years for good reason: they're finally taking off.

Wind production in the US has grown from about 2 million megawatt-hours / month in 2005 to 33 million megawatt-hours / month today.

Solar production in the US has grown from 1.5 million megawatt-hours / month in 2014 to 17 million megawatt-hours today.

Building new wind and solar is now cost-competitive with continuing to run existing coal power plants.

With a friendly federal government (if our government actually does anything), I expect wind and solar to grow immensely in the next 10 years. Wind especially looks strong right now.

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/

The EIA expects 10% growth in wind and solar this summer compared to a year ago.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=47936

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

#249

Post by jay_kyburz »

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.

The fires, here in Australia and the US.

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

#250

Post by lolc »

kktkti9 wrote: post #238
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…

We’ve had empirical measure of industry related climate change since the 1860s hidden away by industry, who continued to be confirm through private research over and over. If our math models can predict the Higgs decades before it’s experimentally discovered, why is a math model from the 70s confirming society will implode in the 2040s any less reliable? Same correct order of operations. Reconfirmed recently by bette…

> Previous generations left behind rock and stone buildings, some sludge at worst.

I don't see why we should ignore the deforestation or hunting to extinction that previous generations imposed on the planet.

Post reply on HN