51–60 of 102 posts
there is also a cool side effect: maybe the world domination game shifts from oil to innovation
That's all well and good if you want to make money, the market operates on hype, but it's less good if you need to make some particular change quickly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Their source http://www.fao.org/home/en/
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?
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…
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).
Oh, and they also have a 9 month lead time, if you're lucky!
And this is after I've spent five figures opening every wall, heavily insulating the place, and buttoning it back up.
I'm not complaining personally; I can afford this okay, but it's impractical to expect even moderately well-off Americans to be able to. This isn't just about the bottom line of developers, 'cause most housing stock is already owned. We're probably looking at massive subsidies to make it happen, and significant resistance because doing it is a huge imposition (one I did willingly, but I knew I was getting into it) reliant on limited labor and materials.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Insulation is a no brainer until you pump it into an older house with poorly sealed walls and end up with a sodden mess next time it rains. Some of the best advice from "green" building professionals is focus on air sealing, efficient electric heat (heat pumps), and eventually rooftop solar. These have complications as well (slave labor solar panels, high gwp refrigerants) but those are often easier to fix than your…
There's no real way to fix that without completely stripping the house down to the frame and rebuilding with modern techniques and materials.
I cannot upvote this enough. We have a strict budget left for carbon emissions. It's not an exam in the future that we are currently studying for to pass. But thinking in budget terms also means talking about budgeting/rationing but I guess it needs to become really bad before we even dare to touch that...
What happens when the budget runs out?
Sure, no one wants to loft sulfur dioxide into the upper atmosphere, but it won’t cost much [2] and we have plenty of natural experiments demonstrating safety (volcanoes). The critical thing is that it would buy time to transition. It’s not like there isn’t a massive interest in transitioning from fossil fuels. But, will we transition fast enough to prevent irreversible runaway positive feedback loops?
[1] interestingly, the rationale for banning solar geoengineering is not the potential danger of the technology, but the (claimed) inability to govern the process. https://www.solargeoeng.org/
Alternatively, here is a view from the Editor of Science, calling for “Symmetric Precaution.” https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm8462
[2] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aae98d/...
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 civilisati…
I don't think a willingness to accept less energy for a decade or two, constitutes an anti-civilization agenda. I don't even think the small fraction of extremists who want everyone living on an organic commune are anti-civilization.
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?
[0] - would have liked a better source but https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-15/electric-...
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…
Nobody serious said the world was going to freeze. Most papers in the field from the 70s onwards were unambiguous about the risks of warming. There is no FUD except by deniers. Stop with the misinformation, this stuff is too important.
Honestly, if I prove you wrong, will you apologize and retract your libel?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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