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

281–290 of 441 posts

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

#281

Post by ghc »

7402 wrote: post #30

The actual title is "Observation-based early-warning signals for a collapse of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation." I don't think the AMOC is exactly the same as the Gulf Stream, although I believe they are related. This is not my area of expertise. Could anyone explain this a little better? Why was the title changed?

Yes, the actual title was ~20 characters too long for the Hacker News submission form. Unfortunately most people wouldn’t know what AMOC stands for, but everyone knows what the gulf stream is.

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

#282

Post by Rodeoclash »

jacquesm wrote: post #96
backprop1993 wrote: post #79

I think back to how we have responded to this pandemic. We were in denial until the pandemic was spreading unchecked wildly through the population, and even a good chunk of the population is still in denial after 100,000s of dead. We are a hopeless species when it comes to organizing effective collective action ahead of known disaster. We seem to only respond collectively once disaster has struck, and even then it ta…

A very large fraction of the population is still in denial, and will continue to be so until they are personally hit.

Exactly. Those same people that are in denial right up to the point where they're being shifted onto ventilators then change their tune to "wishing they took the vaccine" will be the same denying climate change right up to the point they burn to death from wildfires consuming their homes.

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

#283

Post by cinntaile »

jacquesm wrote: post #43
cinntaile wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just watch The Day After Tomorrow to know what happens.

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.

I guess the joke flew over your head :P

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

#284

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

Permit wrote: post #78
jacquesm wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That strikes me as close-to-impossible for industrialized nations to achieve. A round-trip flight from NYC to SF emits 1.5 metric tons per passenger. In order to reach 1.61 metric tons an individual would not be able to own a gas-powered car, could not regularly consume meat, could not live in remote areas only visitable by plane etc. So? > Many things people don't even consider "luxuries" (like visiting family ove…

> So? You have made peace with these things which is commendable. That said, you must still understand how big of a change this would be for other people who have not. For example, I suspect the Canadian government would have a hard time telling indigenous populations in Nunavut that they have banned flights to their communities. Same would go for island nations like Iceland or even the state of Hawaii. You and I can…

Reality doesn't care what humans want.

The options are make some voluntary changes now, or make very chaotic and much bigger forced changes later.

If we make the wrong choice our culture becomes extinct. We may or may not survive as an animal species, but that's almost a secondary issue.

That's it. That's what's on the table. Short of surprise alien intervention or unobtanium Magical Carbon Capture Technology™ there are no other choices.

The political problem is that we've managed to isolate ourselves from both physical and emotional challenges to the extent that we'd rather believe in a variety of fantasy game tokens than deal with reality.

But if that's the best we're capable of as a species, that's where we are. No one is going to give us a special pass. We'll just be one more failed species in a very long list, and that will be that.

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

#286

Post by abeppu »

tsss wrote: post #223
abeppu wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crazy thing is it _is_ hitting the wealthy parts, but that still hasn't galvanized sufficient response. A very partial list of headline impacts in the first world off the top of my head: - US West Coast droughts and fires - Pacific Northwest heat dome - Texas cold snap - Epic floods in Germany - Australian wild fires - European heat waves - Even when rich SF techies were under a terrifying orange sky, our behavio…

SF techies making 100k/year are not rich and definitely not the Germans making 40k. As long as there are no spontaneous hurricanes sucking Jeff Bezos' space rocket out of the sky, nothing will change.

I think this is a kind of "no true scotsman." The original comment was that effects must hit the "majority of the planet right in the gut (and then preferably the wealthy part)". SF is certainly a wealthy part of the planet, and trying to shift the reference group to only apply to the richest individuals is a little absurd. Unless literally the richest guy on the planet is specifically endangered, nothing will change?

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

#287

Post by wittycardio »

qweqwweqwe-90i wrote: post #146
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…

It would have been nice if the environmentalists hadn't stopped nuclear energy in it's tracks.

Would be nicer if you knew who to actually blame

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

#288

Post by klyrs »

jay_kyburz wrote: post #274
klyrs wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be surprised if any 'secret ecosystem projects' don't suffer the same fate as the Biospheres. Namely, catastrophic systemic collapse within a relativity short timescale brought on by an unmitigated pathogen.

well, that's why we need to do the research and develop tech to help us measure, manage, and balance an ecosystem.

I can't disagree with that, but the problem with the notion that there are secret biosphere projects is that it's hard to keep secrets. The more people know, the easier it is for knowledge to leak. Conversely, research is hard, and the number of researchers required grows with the complexity of the research. Biospheres are incredibly complex, ergo private secret biosphere projects are almost certainly doomed to fail.

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

#289

Post by VintageCool »

felgueres wrote: post #212

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), c…

Renewable energy is the most likely solution to this problem. Wind and solar are ready to scale and take over electricity generation.

Wind, solar, batteries, and transmission lines. That is a solution we could deploy today and it is being deployed today. There is a further backlog of wind projects in the US that could be unlocked if we approve transmission lines (like SOO Green) to bring power from the Midwest to the Northeast.

https://www.volts.wtf/p/transmission-fortnight-burying-power

The amount of power that we produce from nuclear in the US basically hasn't changed in 20 years. Wind has gone from almost zero to 8.4% of our total production in 15 years. Solar has gone from almost zero to 2.3% in 5 years. I expect that the US will be producing more power from wind than coal in 5 years.

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

#290

Post by wittycardio »

Nimitz14 wrote: post #240
jacquesm wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I've done: - designed and built a house on renewable energy - designed and built a windmill Unfortunately both of these I have had to abandon, the former because it is on the wrong continent compared to where I am today, the latter because of permitting hassles. - I do have the maximum surface of the roof covered in solar panels, a good 2500W peak. - transport myself everywhere I can using bicycle / e-bike ( - e…

The only thing that would actually make a difference is going full nuclear. But the greens put a stop to that, so I find it hard to take them - and anyone else who, like you, writes paragraphs about things that in reality do not matter - seriously.

As opposed to you who has the insight of a child ?
Post reply on HN