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

251–260 of 1001 posts

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

#251

Post by axelroze »

automatic6131 wrote: post #114
ur-whale wrote: post #96

Every one is focused on climate change. But climate change is just a symptom, and absolutely not the disease. No one seems to want to discuss or even mention the actual root cause of climate change, namely: there are simply too many people on the planet. Go back to less than 1B human on planet earth, and climate change will stop being a problem in a heartbeat. But the implications of such a drastic population decreas…

Yeah, how do you think planning the largest genocide in history sounds to people? Do you even hear yourself? Do you want to go to 6 out of 7 people and tell them they cannot breed? What will be the punishment if they do? Or will you forcibly sterilise them?

World population will decline in any case if/when climate catastrophe happens. People will drown, drop dead from heats, die from starvation, etc. It's the Lotka-Volterra model where the predator is the environment.

Climate catastrophe is created by humans. Climate catastrophe kills humans. Conclusion: Humans kill humans. The genocide (mass scale murder) is already here (assuming climate change will be as bad as worst predictions are)

Only the strongest will survive. That is the cornerstone of Nazi ethics. That will also be the reality of everyone when food and water gets scarce. Damned if you sterilise 6B people, damned if you don't and they die from heat or fighting each other for food.

Moral theoretisising aside, population will decline before the total climate collapse. The current ethical beliefs of feminism, harsh economic conditions for young people (inequality and foreseeable end of growth), depressing reality how we will die horribly from ISIS, China or Climate Change. All of them bring about to less pairs creating children.

But humans will survive. We are worse than cockroaches. Nothing can destroy us. Mars might happen. Singularity maybe. But human race will persist in any case as long as earth persists in any livable state (-60 to +60 degrees C, somewhat fresh Air and uncontaminated water). Humans will downscale to a couple millions but will remain.

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

#252

Post by wffurr »

oliwarner wrote: post #207
rich_sasha wrote: post #170

It’s just so hard to know what actions have what impact on CO2 production. Some are high-pain, low-gain (switching devices off instead of standby?), some are opposite (cycling instead of driving when possible etc). For that if for no other reason, I’d rather if consumer prices included an explicit CO2 tax. The here can be a rebate for poorer people, or personal allowance, whatever, but there would be a fixed yardstic…

I think we all have a fairly good idea of some things that would help, it's the scale we struggle to comprehend. But even if you could find out the magic threshold for what it would take , if there's anything that lockdown and covid restrictions in the UK have taught me in the past 18 months, it's that we all need to follow the rules or it's pointless. It's so disheartening to see others not pay these taxes, to not r…

Long past time to start enforcing carbon tariffs on non-compliant countries.

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

#253

Post by whimsicalism »

oliwarner wrote: post #207
rich_sasha wrote: post #170

It’s just so hard to know what actions have what impact on CO2 production. Some are high-pain, low-gain (switching devices off instead of standby?), some are opposite (cycling instead of driving when possible etc). For that if for no other reason, I’d rather if consumer prices included an explicit CO2 tax. The here can be a rebate for poorer people, or personal allowance, whatever, but there would be a fixed yardstic…

I think we all have a fairly good idea of some things that would help, it's the scale we struggle to comprehend. But even if you could find out the magic threshold for what it would take , if there's anything that lockdown and covid restrictions in the UK have taught me in the past 18 months, it's that we all need to follow the rules or it's pointless. It's so disheartening to see others not pay these taxes, to not r…

> If we're not all in this together, what's the point?

The point is that while we are squabbling over the most fair division of the burden, we are screwing future generations.

Qatar has 0.03% of the worlds population. We can't let climate renegade states preclude us from taking action, and we can't sit around until we have a world government.

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

#254

Post by perfunctory »

holografix wrote: post #231

I have this overwhelming feeling that it’s over. Are there publications and articles or studies etc about how the rich are preparing for the impact of climate change? Are there large swaths of Alaska being bought up? Farms in California being sold cheap? Mega security mansions popping up in New Zealand? Fresh water supply chains suddenly being consolidated under the same biz? Is this part of the reason why China is g…

New Zealand https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2018-rich-new-zealand-doo...

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

#255

Post by skinkestek »

truckerbill wrote: post #238

Out of curiosity, who here is trying to make a change? Through either lifestyle or lobbying. If not why?

Have been doing a lot of the right things for a couple of decades already, mostly because it is also the smart thing to do from a personal economic perspective though.

- reuse / repair instead of throwing away

- buying used

- put effort into maintenance

- avoiding wasteful activities

I actually enjoy it and I have a good life.

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

#256

Post by zejn »

fnoof wrote: post #185

Most of the comments here are opinions on what other people should do to stop climate change. For those that have read up on it, What are the highest impact things the average hacker news reader can do over the next few years?

For direct emissions: Stop burning stuff. Do you call it fuel? Stop burning it. Or at least burn it as little as possible.

EVs and heat pumps solve two of biggest personal direct emissions sources: transportation and heating living spaces.

Beyond that, if you own a roof, get solar panels. Those are a modern miracle at capturing 20% of the Sun's energy, when photosynthesis for crop plants is about 1% to 2%.

Grow your own food, if you have a garden.

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

#257

Post by jimworm »

For all the carbon capture that the Devonian/Carboniferous period did over 100 million years, humanity undid a large part of it in 150 or so years. And now to preserve human civilisation in some form, the most direct way is probably to rebuild that carbon sink within a much shorter time. Much shorter than 150 years, not 100 million.

Current carbon emissions are over 10 billion tonnes per year, so the capture speed will have to exceed that by however much required, probably something like 10x as much. If a process could be scaled to capture 100 billions tonnes of carbon per year, it could be a viable way out of the mess.

Is it even possible with current technology given unlimited funding and political will? For example, if insoluble carbonates could be synthesised from atmospheric carbon dioxide, that could be a form of long-term carbon storage.

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

#258

Post by dredmorbius »

poorjohnmacafee wrote: post #47

> But there is new hope that deep cuts in emissions of greenhouse gases could stabilise rising temperatures. How is this possible when you have water vapor in a positive feedback loop, which is a far more potent, prevalent ghg that increases with any rise in temperature. "Water vapor reduction" has to be part of the message at this stage, not just carbon reduction.

Water vapour has a short residence time in the atmosphere, is self-limiting (excess water precipitates out as rain or snow), and is already at equilibrium given ambient conditions.

The one variable that could drive additional water vapour is CO2, which by warming the atmosphere further increases the ability to hold water, and the amount of water vapour present.

If you want to reduce water vapour as a greenhouse-gas component of the atmosphere, reduce CO2 levels.

https://skepticalscience.com/water-vapor-greenhouse-gas.htm

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

#260

Post by danybittel »

nosianu wrote: post #201
rich_sasha wrote: post #170

It’s just so hard to know what actions have what impact on CO2 production. Some are high-pain, low-gain (switching devices off instead of standby?), some are opposite (cycling instead of driving when possible etc). For that if for no other reason, I’d rather if consumer prices included an explicit CO2 tax. The here can be a rebate for poorer people, or personal allowance, whatever, but there would be a fixed yardstic…

> It’s just so hard to know what actions have what impact on CO2 production Not really. For some reason the actually quite simple problem is needlessly complicated in the discussions. Stop digging up ANY carbon from below ground where it was safely buried. Any carbon above ground is part of the cycle that includes atmospheric CO2. You need huge effort to change how much of it is in CO2 form at any time while still ha…

I really like your post!

It's not rocket science. Too many interest groups are convoluting the issue.

But, I think to clearest, easiest way is to just ban "coal, gas, oil". Then let the lack of it "tickle" through the economy.

Not by tomorrow, mind you, have it gradually reduce. Where there are problems, help with tax money.

We've done it before, with asbestos, lead in gas, ..

Post reply on HN