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

311–320 of 1001 posts

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

#311

Post by em500 »

danybittel wrote: post #260
nosianu wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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, ..

Of course, many problems have fairly obvious physical solutions you ignore all costs of said "solutions". Containing a pandemic is also not rocket science. Just have everybody stay at home simulataneously for 2 or 3 months.

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

#312

Post by Gigachad »

truckerbill wrote: post #238

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

Recently moved to the city and got rid of my car. I now walk everywhere. I feel like this has cut out a fairly significant chunk of my impact.

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

#313

Post by ThalesX »

zthrowaway wrote: post #269
oliwarner wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The attempt to force people into limiting their lives for CO2 concerns falls into environmental authoritarianism. That’s why. Lots of people see it that way and when you mix hyperbolic environmentalist doomsday predictions that never actually happen people stop taking this seriously. Additionally, the US is built on the foundation of personal freedom and autonomy. We would be the last country where people would willi…

> Additionally, the US is built on the foundation of personal freedom and autonomy.

What a… onesided view of the world. Do you think other countries are built on the foundation of being under the boot and up for restructuring themselves for someone’s agenda?

Should we stop calling out Saudi Arabia and China because they are built in a certain way? Are we Europeans not allowed to say no to a tax, because we were built on serfdoms?

MURICA!

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

#314

Post by tonyedgecombe »

zthrowaway wrote: post #284
czzr wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The inability of the US to pass a carbon tax will be one of humanities great tragedies. That they are the theoretical champions of the free market is just piling cruel irony on top of that.

What’s with the hyperbole when this topic is discussed every time? It doesn’t add weight to your argument after a certain point. With the US being no where near China and India in CO2 production I think it’ll be fine. You can sleep safe and sound at night.

>With the US being no where near China and India in CO2 production I think it’ll be fine.

Until you look at per capita consumption.

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

#315

Post by atoav »

rob_c wrote: post #212
shadowfaxRodeo wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if every person on the planet did what you reasonably expect of yourself, we would still not even be close to reducing CO2 production. By all means do those things. But if you want to make a real difference you need to look beyond your own activities. Change your community, your company, your industry. What can you do that changes the defaults for everyone else? Try and find low-hanging fruit. Join your local cl…

Not sure what solutions that group is supposed to be espoucing but they're mostly just a political lobbying group. Frankly until the shouting and arguing stops and someone who can make a difference comes to the table I'm out. There is was too much posturing which makes no difference and is bad on both sides from plastic signs complaining about pollution to politicians who travel from ecological disaster to ecological…

The world collapsed but on the bright side user rob_c managed to uphold their principles

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

#316

Post by m4rtink »

brailsafe wrote: post #243
virgilp wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1.5 or 2 degrees do not seem like much Did not seem like much to me, until I realized that 28 degrees inside the house is "comfortable" while 30 is "too hot".

In what world is 28°C comfortable!?

Maybe when it's really dry inside ? But indeed, over 25/26 with central european humidity is unpleasant.

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

#317

Post by whimsicalism »

konspence wrote: post #93
matco11 wrote: post #16

> This pact aims to keep the rise in global temperatures well below 2C this century and to pursue efforts to keep it under 1.5C. It seems to me that continuing to communicate just the average temperature increase is a missed opportunity to engage with a greater portion of the population. 1.5 or 2 degrees do not seem like much, but once one understands that’s an average made out of much bigger positive and negative sw…

There's nothing to "keep" under 1.5C, we are pretty much already there when error bars are considered. 2C is going to be breached regardless because even if we went carbon neutral today we have decades of locked in warming. Why the scientists are not communicating this information which has been in pop-science (as early as An Inconvenient Truth (2006), which documents the lag between CO2 rise and temp rise) is beyond…

The exact way climate lag functions is still a very uncertain science. It is communicated, but it can't be communicated we because (unlike how Al Gore portrays it) the evidence around how long the lag is is still very uncertain.

I've done a lot of research into this because I am interested in climate lag.

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

#318

Post by ZeroGravitas »

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…

You're not really disagreeing with the previous poster.

We need to do what you suggest as quickly as possible. That means some things that depend on that carbon downstream should be stopped, replaced with alternatives or at the very least heavily discouraged while a market for substitutes created. But how do we decide which ones to do first? Ideally the cheapest and biggest impact. Our best tool for doing so is probably a well regulated market with a carbon fee.

Unfortunately, the same groups that caused the problem, then tried to cover up the problem, then attacked all the solutions continues to talk about how great a carbon tax will be, while also funding the politicians who will never let it happen.

But, if you want to know what the most sensible answer is then just look at what vaguely sensible countries are doing. What they're doing today is probably what we should all have been doing 20 years ago.

This usually involves putting some kind of financial incentive on electricity producers to move to low carbon alternatives (gas is fine as a short term substitute, but if we'd started 20 years ago we'd no longer need it today) and other CO2 emitters to use electricity rather than fossil fuels (e.g. cars).

Other basic elements are carbon tariffs to stop other countries undercutting your efforts.

It's not rocket science. The whole "this is impossible" stuff is just bullshit from the people who don't want to do it. EVs, Solar and Wind Turbines were all impossible according to the same people. Most of the moonshot stuff is trying to come up with a technical solution to the political issues, and that's hard.

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

#319

Post by dade_ »

zelphirkalt wrote: post #206
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…

If you have children, then that is probably the most impactful. They will need/want the same living standards as other people. They get the full package of other impactful things you mention plus some more like house building. For example a young family does no longer live in the same small 2 person flat, but instead builds a house (or lets build). Especially in first world countries and developing to first world cou…

Instead of trying to control people's lives and their very personal decision to have children and how many, we should be ensuring every women in every country in the world is provided at least basic education. A vast amount of benefits including an 'automatic' birth rate drop.

The population in the first world is dropping. Immigration from less wealthy countries is the reason for the growth.

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

#320

Post by benjaminwootton »

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…

Not sure if I’ll get voted down as a conspiracy theorist, but some kind of mobile app “passport” or “digital ID” would be a great way of tracking your carbon budget. Especially with a bit of big tech surveillance supporting the whole programme.

I wonder how they could get something like that adopted quickly?

Post reply on HN