101–110 of 165 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Photosynthesis is limited by the availability of light, water, co2 and warmth.
This is like saying my computer's performance in a game is limited by CPU, GPU, and RAM while my CPU is maxed out 90% of the time.
This assumes that global warming is the problem, but arguably the most pressing aspect of carbon pollution is the acidification of the oceans which this plan would not address. It might make more sense to focus on capturing carbon pollution than to mitigate some of the side effects of rampant carbon pollution.
[spoiler]
the planet is getting hot because the all-powerful entity messed up, so it makes big clouds, which in turn kill all the plants, so he makes all plants able to run with less light ..
This assumes that global warming is the problem, but arguably the most pressing aspect of carbon pollution is the acidification of the oceans which this plan would not address. It might make more sense to focus on capturing carbon pollution than to mitigate some of the side effects of rampant carbon pollution.
However, as other have pointed out, this might be able to buy us some time to develop negative emissions technology (which is ultimately the only way out). Hopefully we would use that time wisely.
All these half assed solutions perpetuate the idea that we can stay on our exponential quest for growth/energy and just find "solutions" later. Climate change is only a small part of the equation; pollution, deforestation, destruction of biodiversity, &c. are all equally problematic. As long as we produce and consume more and more we won't get away from the inevitable. At some point we'll run out of half assed soluti…
Half assed solutions are still better than nothing.
If your house is on fire and you use an ice cube to cool your neck it'll feel good for a bit too, but you would achieve nothing, or even worse, you'd be under the impression of doing something while losing precious time.
We know what the right solutions are, but doing the right things is hard, hence we focus on meaningless half assed solution which are, in the end, only aggravating the situation. Notice how all these solutions always are about adding things to the system, never about slowing down, using less, producing less.
At the end of the day every single metric point to the fact that we're fucking up big time and that our slow incremental half assed solutions are nowhere near enough. The best case scenarios of our best current solutions are still not enough, and we're never meeting our own "not enough" goals.
You don't fix a problem by fixing it's final symptoms
This assumes that global warming is the problem, but arguably the most pressing aspect of carbon pollution is the acidification of the oceans which this plan would not address. It might make more sense to focus on capturing carbon pollution than to mitigate some of the side effects of rampant carbon pollution.
I'm not sure I buy that, but sure, both are important problems. Question, what do we know about the ocean as a carbon sink? Is it's capture rate variable with anthing? Is it easier to capture carbon from the ocean than in the air? Could we try to increase the capture rate into the ocean and then extract rapidly from the same area?
Also yes, ocean acidification is likely to be the bigger immediate problem. People depend heavily on fish protein and other sealife. That plus poor farming yields will be bad.
Mao Zedong thought so too (sparrow killings) and produced hunger and suffering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like most of the brighter clouds generated would be over the ocean in this particular scenario, so shouldn’t affect plants too much.
Just plankton and algae and the largest ecosystem on the planet, right? There's always a gotcha, because nature is a chaotic, complex system that is mathematically impossible to account for all the consequences of exercising leverage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a load of crap. Sure, everyone reading and responding to this did profit from CO2 emissions for sure, but reducing emissions without going back to the stone-age is perfectly possible and this should be clear to anyone : We could simply start taxing Co2 emissions, which would boost renewable energy buildout INSTANTLY: One example: Right now, electricity (and concrete) are DIRT cheap-- my electricity bill is a com…
I'm sorry to be this blunt but you're completely out of touch with reality. In the whole of Europe electricity prices are currently through the roof, marking records on many countries... daily . [edit: mostly because CO2 emission taxes and because gas producing countries can charge whatever they want because the whole continent (but France) depends on them] Just because people (normal everyday working-class) people p…
The amount of clothes, electronics, food and such that gets wasted is just enormous on our societies. Only places in the world where people live somewhat ecologically are those where they simply can't afford such waste. So, IMO everything that isn't a basic necessity should be made much more expensive to force people rethink their consumption habits.