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

751–760 of 1001 posts

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

#751

Post by titzer »

whiddershins wrote: post #436

The notion that humanity would go extinct from any of this is absolutely unrealistic. What we are talking about is at worst massive economic damage and loss of life, similar to a very serious war. Which is horrible, but really not the threat it is made out to be. Moreover, since these changes happen relatively slowly (compared to bombs and such) much of the loss of life can be mitigated. So we are talking economic da…

Oh, I agree with you that humanity probably won't go extinct in the next 100 or maybe even 200 years. We're pretty adaptable.

But if you think the global oceans being completely empty of fish--I mean, nothing larger than your hand is alive--entire continents reverting to first savannah, then desert, and parts currently desert literally becoming uninhabitable, then yeah, sure, it's some economic damage and a small war.

This isn't "adapting to a changing planet". It's more like "adapting to life without the leg I am currently hacking at with a dull rusty blade--oh look, bone! can't quit now...".

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

#752

Post by signaturefish »

kieranmaine wrote: post #738
signaturefish wrote: post #619

Possibly-relatedly, I'm in the process of getting some retrofit work done on my house to improve its insulation and reduce the carbon costs of heating it. I absolutely had not appreciated that a place like this, an 80s brick-built terraced house in southern England, could be responsible for 3.4 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year in heating costs alone. The necessary retrofit work is expensive, on the order of £50'000 o…

I think it will be more feasible to decarbonize the heating instead. If feasible heat storage technology can mature and lower the cost of electric heating then it becomes financially viable. Out of interest, what work are you getting done?

The whole bill of work is as follows:

* Full external-wall-insulation (180mm thick) with brick slip dressing so it doesn't stick out like a sore thumb amidst all the brick houses in the road.

* Triple-glazed windows and doors throughout, replacing single-glazed original units which are at end-of-life.

* 300mm deep loft insulation, replacing poor-quality and patchy 80-100mm insulation.

* Full airtightness sealing (i.e. the house should leak almost no warm air to the outside world), ...with heat-recovering mechanical ventilation so we don't all suffocate.

* Air-source heat pump to replace the gas boiler, driving underfloor heating in place of the wet-circuit radiators.

* 12-panel solar photovoltaic install on the roof (plus batteries etc).

Fully agreed on decarbonizing heating, but it's not an either/or thing, both approaches work and are to some extent necessary. Any heat you're not losing to the outside world doesn't need to be replaced by the heating system, is the theory. Here in the UK, I'm working to AECB (Association of Eco-Conscious Builders) standards: we cant quite hit PassiveHaus without knocking the whole thing down and rebuilding, but we can get pretty close.

There's a whole separate argument to be had about subsidy of electric heating vs subsidy of gas heating, if I recall correctly. A good electric heating system should be just as effective as a gas system, but in the UK it can cost up to four times as much to run because of the current mess of subsidies. That needs sorting out, as well, as telling people they have to pay much more for a somewhat more eco-conscious system isn't going to fly with the general population.

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

#753

Post by jazzyjackson »

justsid wrote: post #656
f6v wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Governments need to tax CO2 emissions on the business side Europe is so taxed I can't even fart without paying to the government. Don't get me wrong, I get a lot for what I pay, but it's borderline too much.

Tough luck everyone, OP said he already pays too many taxes, so unfortunately climate action has to go on the back burner. But good news, at least while we are still alive he won’t feel like the government is taking took much.

You’re mocking a useful data point: governments operate by the consent of the governed - if you put too much pressure on people, they will replace you democratically or otherwise.

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

#755

Post by titzer »

frockington1 wrote: post #605
kumarvvr wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The notion that humanity would go extinct from any of this is absolutely unrealistic Why not? With the current societal focus on materialism and luxury, perpetuation of greed and glorification of power, climate need not do much. Wipe out some fraction of the population is all it needs to do. The rest will be done by us. The last two people will fire bombs at each other and kill each other for sure.

> The last two people will fire bombs at each other and kill each other for sure. We've had nuclear bombs for 70 years now and yet we're still alive. This doesn't seem to support this stance. I also don't see everyone on earth rolling over the second it gets a little hotter. Sure some people will but the vast majority will want to survive

My mom is 80 years old and still alive. Therefore she will live to be 160.

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

#756

Post by aantix »

jsonne wrote: post #360

If there is anything covid has taught me its that collective action isn't something we can rely on and is a lot more wishful thinking about the state of humanity rather than a sober look at the reality. Governments need to tax CO2 emissions on the business side and pour the money into carbon capture technology in the private space through investment and perhaps some sort of bounty program (you get $x for each ton you…

You mean… what you have determined as “the right thing”.

Even though others may also have different needs, desires, and risks.

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

#757

Post by [deleted] »

jpfed wrote: post #714
jsonne wrote: post #360

If there is anything covid has taught me its that collective action isn't something we can rely on and is a lot more wishful thinking about the state of humanity rather than a sober look at the reality. Governments need to tax CO2 emissions on the business side and pour the money into carbon capture technology in the private space through investment and perhaps some sort of bounty program (you get $x for each ton you…

As a programmer, I empathize with the impulse to go with the elegant, unified solution of carbon taxes. The problem is that everybody gets hurt, in at least a short-term sense, by a carbon tax. And yes, a lot of people will understand that this is a necessary pain. But all the worst carbon offenders that might campaign against a climate policy would get hurt by the same thing at the same time, so they would provide a…

[deleted]

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

#758

Post by daxfohl »

Was there anything about food supply? I see that as the biggest concern. We can deal with heat and floods and such. But when the world's bio ecosystem starts looking like the Great Barrier Reef's, then that's when we start talking about collapse or extinction.

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

#759

Post by mtooth »

merpnderp wrote: post #720

If anyone actually believed it was "code red for humanity" they'd be pushing nuclear power. There is zero chance of moving off carbon energy sources without causing catastrophic mayhem, unless we use massive amounts of nuclear. For instance, the last 4 years my state has averaged 37% production of total possible installed wind generation capacity. This is a very windy state which is in the top 2 for installed wind ca…

Agreed - if the situation is as dire as presented then nuclear fission is the only clear solution today for baseload power. All the rebuttals I usually read seem to present hypothetical alternatives that may very well come to fruition but we have nuclear as a well-tested and known solution to the problem ready for us to begin using today should we simply decide to act.

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

#760

Post by mywittyname »

ptkd wrote: post #740
merpnderp wrote: post #720

If anyone actually believed it was "code red for humanity" they'd be pushing nuclear power. There is zero chance of moving off carbon energy sources without causing catastrophic mayhem, unless we use massive amounts of nuclear. For instance, the last 4 years my state has averaged 37% production of total possible installed wind generation capacity. This is a very windy state which is in the top 2 for installed wind ca…

I see this take a lot, and it’s kind of misinformed. The primary drawbacks of nuclear are: 1) incredible slow to build. A typical plant takes ~20 years from decision to productionized 2) extremely expensive, with a massively frontloaded cost. By contrast, solar and wind are fast to install and now cheaper. > wind power can be zero at some parts of the day There are a few solutions to this actually. First, having a mo…

Nuclear power can be fast to build. It would need to be constructed in volume, with immutable designs. Right now, America builds so few nuclear plants that they are essentially all one-off designs. Mass production is key here.

Vis-à-vis costs, the government can poof into existence trillions of dollars with no ill effects. Cost is an easily overcome obstacle.

If a mandate came down to produce 1000 new nuclear reactors by 2030, I think it could be achieved. The country just needs the political will to make it happen.

Post reply on HN