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

Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 102 posts

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#41

Post by fredoliveira »

billfor wrote: post #39
WaitWaitWha wrote: post #17

I am all in to be a good custodian of the world. But I am tired of the insipid, agitated state, screaming and pushing fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD). When I was a young man, I was told the world will freeze, and within five years we will all die. (Good times for fur trade!) Then, the ozone layer will be gone, and within five years we will all die. (SPF 5000 anyone?) Suddenly in the early '80s it flipped to the wo…

Also, there are more bees now than 10 years ago when they were supposed to all be dying and the polar bear population is not decreasing. Biggest carbon footprint you make is your kids....

> Also, there are more bees now than 10 years ago when they were supposed to all be dying and the polar bear population is not decreasing.

Do you have sources for these 2 claims? Not that I doubt you, necessarily, but I'd love to check the data.

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#42

Post by tomp »

thatcherc wrote: post #14

The main action advocated by the author here is to increase efficiency (in insulation, appliances, food production, transportation) as a means to curb CO2 emissions and slow climate change - all very important. Lately I've been reading Saul Griffith's book "Electrify" which proposes a different tack - "simply" electrify all energy usage and let people maintain their current lifestyles exactly. Interestingly, doing so…

Indeed.

"Fighting Climate Change" is all sunshine and rainbows and photovoltaics until you realise that the messaging has been thoroughly usurped by an anti-civilisation regressive agenda. They don't want people using cleaner energy; they primarily want people using less energy; they sell that goal with promotion of "eco" and "green" etc.

I want us to use more AND cleaner energy; one without the other is a civilisation-level failure.

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#43

Post by babagabooj »

thatcherc wrote: post #14

The main action advocated by the author here is to increase efficiency (in insulation, appliances, food production, transportation) as a means to curb CO2 emissions and slow climate change - all very important. Lately I've been reading Saul Griffith's book "Electrify" which proposes a different tack - "simply" electrify all energy usage and let people maintain their current lifestyles exactly. Interestingly, doing so…

Works in Norway but I believe the US still depends in large part on fossil fuels to generate electricity, no?

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#44

Post by jnsaff2 »

kerneloftruth wrote: post #24
WaitWaitWha wrote: post #17

I am all in to be a good custodian of the world. But I am tired of the insipid, agitated state, screaming and pushing fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD). When I was a young man, I was told the world will freeze, and within five years we will all die. (Good times for fur trade!) Then, the ozone layer will be gone, and within five years we will all die. (SPF 5000 anyone?) Suddenly in the early '80s it flipped to the wo…

According to AOC, the earth will end in 6 years (she predicted 10 years remaining 4 years ago). I'm not aware of an update to her estimate.

That number likely came from the 2018 IPCC report which said pretty much this: if something does not happen then by 2030 the there is no realistic pathway to stay belos 2C increase in temperature. World would not end in 2030, but irreversible change would be locked in. Obviously AOC might have been simplifying this or whoever reported on it might have dumbed it down or pushed their own agenda.

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#45

Post by distances »

stickyricky wrote: post #38
hgomersall wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's much easier to maintain lifestyles by being more efficient than by any other means. Most energy is simply wasted. There is basically no downside to things like properly insulating houses (except perhaps the bottom line of the property developers).

And air quality concerns. You need to ventilate your home with outside air year round.

In the Nordics the baseline is triple glazed windows and mechanical ventilation with exhaust air heat recovery. I'm sure doing the same elsewhere would be a good start at least

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#46

Post by [deleted] »

kerneloftruth wrote: post #24
WaitWaitWha wrote: post #17

I am all in to be a good custodian of the world. But I am tired of the insipid, agitated state, screaming and pushing fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD). When I was a young man, I was told the world will freeze, and within five years we will all die. (Good times for fur trade!) Then, the ozone layer will be gone, and within five years we will all die. (SPF 5000 anyone?) Suddenly in the early '80s it flipped to the wo…

According to AOC, the earth will end in 6 years (she predicted 10 years remaining 4 years ago). I'm not aware of an update to her estimate.

[deleted]

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#47

Post by eldaisfish »

rhino369 wrote: post #18
lopis wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just that. There are critical mass effects where, after a certain level, positive feedback loops will cascade to all systems. There's definitely a point where we're fucked and won't be able to unfuck ourselves.

I'm far from an expert on climate. But my understanding when I looked into these issues ~8 years ago for a class, was that massive positive feedback loop stuff was not really accepted by the mainstream of scientists. Of course there are positive feedback components, but there are negative ones too. And stuff like clathrate gun, etc., can't be found in the IPCC reports. The 2 degree goal is more or less arbitrary. edi…

the point is that these effects are difficult to predict. The challenge is that a changing climate may upset ecological balances in ways that are difficult to predict and difficult to counter.

Take the indian subcontinent as a great example. That is a region of a billion people dependent entirely on the monsoon for water. The region is surrounded by deserts to the west and north. If the monsoon is disrupted due to climate change, what will happen to those billion people? It's worse still if you consider that glacial meltwater from the himalayas also feeds China's largest rivers.

On the flip side, too much rain and there is also a disaster.

This is the point - we don't know what will happen but can be certain it will be bad.

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#48

Post by spicymaki »

cloutchaser wrote: post #8
profunctor wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does more natural gas have to be part of the answer?

If you switch all the wood burning in third world countries, and all the coal fired stations to natural gas, you reduce emissions considerably. You need to do this because third world countries can't afford renewables, or there simply isn't enough supply to roll it out quickly (within 10-20 years). But they burn a lot of wood, which is unnecessary, and can be switched to gas cheaply and easily. Considering it will st…

I am not sure I agree on the natural gas idea. Methane is 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. It can be very efficient at point of combustion vs coal or oil. The problem is the drilling, extraction, and pipeline leaks.

Many developing countries are near the equator and can take advantage of solar. The distributed nature of solar is also a benefit for countries that lack infrastructure. Why not start with a cleaner solution? Countries in Africa and South America can increase their use of hydroelectric power as well.

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#49

Post by malloryerik »

Bill McKibben has an idea for fighting climate change and Putin at the same time. Basically, he has a plan to get Europe decarbonized enough by next winter that it doesn't need Russian gas or oil.

Article -- This is how we defeat Putin and other petrostate autocrats https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/25/this-i...

Video Interview -- https://youtu.be/rJ9XfdbCddk Bill McKibben: How To Defeat Putin and Climate Change | Amanpour and Company

Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now

#50

Post by thatcherc »

radicalbyte wrote: post #25
thatcherc wrote: post #14

The main action advocated by the author here is to increase efficiency (in insulation, appliances, food production, transportation) as a means to curb CO2 emissions and slow climate change - all very important. Lately I've been reading Saul Griffith's book "Electrify" which proposes a different tack - "simply" electrify all energy usage and let people maintain their current lifestyles exactly. Interestingly, doing so…

Electrification requires energy-efficiency savings. Insulation is specifically an absolute no-brainer - it's cheap and save a lot of energy (and money). Currently it seems that rentals are the issue more than anything.

> Electrification requires energy-efficiency savings.

I don't think it does. In principle, you could stay relatively inefficient with low cost to the climate as long as you were drawing power from overprovisioned wind and solar. Of course, that energy may be better spent elsewhere so efficiency is critical, but we can't get carbon emissions down to zero by only increasing efficiency of systems that ultimately draw power from coal and natural gas power plants.

Post reply on HN