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

Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 1001 posts

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#31

Post by skinkestek »

So now we can get rid of fast fashion, mandate reusability for products, reintroduce basic woodworking, metalcrafting and sewing/repair work in school and with that get rid of a huge chunk of the needless shipping?

Or are we still going to go after individuals eating traditional food while thought leaders fly across the globe in private jets (no kidding) telling us we need to change our diet?

PS: I'm already a enthusiastic carbon cutter even if it historically has been because it correlated very well with cost cutting and self sufficiency.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#32

Post by RandomLensman »

brylie wrote: post #19
RandomLensman wrote: post #5

If some things "are irreversible on timescales of centuries to millennia" then really just going carbon neutral etc. sounds like a pretty weak approach as it would create costs now and large benefits only far in the future. Maybe this really needs geoengineering (and more spending on mitigation)?

Has any means of geoengineering been demonstrated as feasable? Given our track record, it would probably be best for us to scale back our consumption while promoting re-forestation. Nature can likely heal itself far better than our wildest geoengineering ambitions.

Clearly feasible, as demonstrated by anthropogenic climate change. Going back to a different life style is an option, but will be strongly opposed by a lot of people (and not without justification).

Planet was much hotter, much colder etc. So as a species we need to learn to cope and tackle this anyway, why not start now?

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#33

Post by de_keyboard »

JCWasmx86 wrote: post #12
eMGm4D0zgUAVXc7 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's instead get rid of private air travel. Has caused a pandemic and millions of deaths. And the emissions are very likely larger than those of Bitcoin. People can go on vacation by train instead. If you demand people use slow legacy money then I can demand slow legacy travel, ok? ;)

I frankly don't think this would make sense. Imagine explaining the people of a country, that they aren't allowed to fly to e.g. Mallorca anymore. The acceptance would be somewhere between low and zero. Maybe private air travel in one country, e.g. from Munich to Berlin could be reduced, but not international flights without any resistance

This is why we are screwed.

I think deep down majority knows the climate is changing, but they are not prepared to make any personal sacrifices.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#34

Post by gfodor »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #23

> Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity' What almost alarms me more than the thought of a climate apocalypse is that I don't think this (a UN report) is going to have any effect on the opinions of 40% of the public who see climate change as some kind of job destroying conspiracy. Nothing short of Florida disappearing under the sea is going to make any difference, perhaps we (as a species) don't deserv…

It seems fairly obvious that climate change is going to be solved before the bigger existential risks we face, which are for the most part unknowable or largely ignored. There are a lot of people working on climate change now, it's well established in the public's mind, and there are many incentives in place to accelerate solutions.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#35

Post by headmelted »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #23

> Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity' What almost alarms me more than the thought of a climate apocalypse is that I don't think this (a UN report) is going to have any effect on the opinions of 40% of the public who see climate change as some kind of job destroying conspiracy. Nothing short of Florida disappearing under the sea is going to make any difference, perhaps we (as a species) don't deserv…

That's all but inevitable at this stage.

The same is true for New York - any city at or only slightly above sea level is a foregone conclusion. Fluid dynamics don't care about your politics.

If it helps, going by elevation maps Disney World should survive with a lot of weather hardening!

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#36

Post by benlumen »

brylie wrote: post #19
RandomLensman wrote: post #5

If some things "are irreversible on timescales of centuries to millennia" then really just going carbon neutral etc. sounds like a pretty weak approach as it would create costs now and large benefits only far in the future. Maybe this really needs geoengineering (and more spending on mitigation)?

Has any means of geoengineering been demonstrated as feasable? Given our track record, it would probably be best for us to scale back our consumption while promoting re-forestation. Nature can likely heal itself far better than our wildest geoengineering ambitions.

I love the idea of planting trees on every available patch of land too, but won't that just fuel more wildfires at this point?

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#37

Post by qeternity »

skinkestek wrote: post #31

So now we can get rid of fast fashion, mandate reusability for products, reintroduce basic woodworking, metalcrafting and sewing/repair work in school and with that get rid of a huge chunk of the needless shipping? Or are we still going to go after individuals eating traditional food while thought leaders fly across the globe in private jets (no kidding) telling us we need to change our diet? PS: I'm already a enthus…

> cost cutting

Do you mind elaborating more on this? Is it just a matter of consuming less == fewer costs?

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#39

Post by wiz21c »

skinkestek wrote: post #31

So now we can get rid of fast fashion, mandate reusability for products, reintroduce basic woodworking, metalcrafting and sewing/repair work in school and with that get rid of a huge chunk of the needless shipping? Or are we still going to go after individuals eating traditional food while thought leaders fly across the globe in private jets (no kidding) telling us we need to change our diet? PS: I'm already a enthus…

The problem is that for many people climate change adaptation boils down to that dichotomy. It'd be nice if there would be people teaching us there are other ways. Of course, we won't escape the fact we use a lot of energy and that, for the time being, most of it produces CO2.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#40

Post by Joeri »

RandomLensman wrote: post #5

If some things "are irreversible on timescales of centuries to millennia" then really just going carbon neutral etc. sounds like a pretty weak approach as it would create costs now and large benefits only far in the future. Maybe this really needs geoengineering (and more spending on mitigation)?

Mitigation spending will happen anyway, the focus rightfully should be on minimizing the need for mitigation. By all accounts mitigation costs more than carbon reduction, it is just spent later on. I suppose it all comes down to how much of the problem our generation wants to kick down the road.

As for geoengineering. If you mean adding particles to cool the atmosphere, then this is a mitigation strategy (it doesn’t reduce carbon, just compensates for it). I think we need to research this to have a plan B, but it is kind of a desperation move, and quite risky, so I wouldn’t consider it smart to have it as plan A.

Post reply on HN