Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth • Hacker News Board

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#61

Post by mitthrowaway2 » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:39 PM UTC

pfisch wrote: post #30

nxm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m willing to do my part once private jets get banned

"Critics of coercive measures targeting private planes point out that a ban would only reduce carbon emissions by 0.2%, based on study of the direct cost of private jets alone." https://flybitlux.com/what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-a-priv... Just admit you're not really intending to "do your part" at all. You just intend to whataboutism everyone else for the forseeable future.

0.2% of all emissions sounds like a disproportionately big win. Like the entire emissions of small country. That's a low hanging fruit. Let's do it!

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#62

Post by bradjohnson » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:39 PM UTC

nxm wrote: post #24

ahelwer wrote: post #9

One eye-opening fact I recently learned is that fossil fuel infrastructure being built today is expected to have a three-decade lifespan, after completion of its construction. So every time you hear about a new pipeline, drilling project, or refinery being built you know that the people sitting in the rooms authorizing billions of dollars being allocated to the project all believe it will safely be operating and prod…

And where are those being built? Overwhelmingly in Asia and Africa

Not true, but don't let facts get in the way of your kneejerk racism.

> The U.S. is leading in global LNG supply growth with an additional 5.9 million tonnes of capacity in 2022, for a total of 80 mtpa.

> Norway saw the second-largest growth in LNG supply, with an additional 2.8 million tonnes of capacity. Malaysia and Qatar were close behind, with 2.4 million tonnes and 2.3 million tonnes of capacity growth in 2022, respectively.

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#63

Post by kitkat_new » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:39 PM UTC

ahelwer wrote: post #9

One eye-opening fact I recently learned is that fossil fuel infrastructure being built today is expected to have a three-decade lifespan, after completion of its construction. So every time you hear about a new pipeline, drilling project, or refinery being built you know that the people sitting in the rooms authorizing billions of dollars being allocated to the project all believe it will safely be operating and prod…

can't understand the downvotes, may someone explain?

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#64

Post by sieabahlpark » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:39 PM UTC

afavour wrote: post #35

nxm wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point is there’s a lot hypocrisy of elitists telling us to reduce our emissions while they’re flying on private jets.

That’s a completely different point.

[dead]

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#65

Post by whimsicalism » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #39

nxm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And where are those being built? Overwhelmingly in Asia and Africa

Plenty of projects in North America and Europe.

The number of refineries, etc. in those places are only decreasing. Sure, there might be some additional projects but for the most part: no.

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#66

Post by TechBro8615 » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

ahelwer wrote: post #9

One eye-opening fact I recently learned is that fossil fuel infrastructure being built today is expected to have a three-decade lifespan, after completion of its construction. So every time you hear about a new pipeline, drilling project, or refinery being built you know that the people sitting in the rooms authorizing billions of dollars being allocated to the project all believe it will safely be operating and prod…

How many of those can be repurposed to refine or carry natural gas?

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#67

Post by advisedwang » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

paganel wrote: post #13

[flagged]

> experts that were promising us that two weeks of strict lockdowns would help us defeat the last pandemic for good

No. Experts (ie the IPCC) are much more pessimistic than what Shell is admitting in this headline. Current models predict that we need to go way way beyond merely ending growth of fossil fuels to even stay below 2C of warming. We'd need to drastically drop the usage, which we are not on track to do with current government policies.

> how does anyone in any position of power expect us, the populace, to follow the same road of hard sacrifices “because science!”?

Would you sacrifice based on a hunch? Of course not. Science is frankly the only thing that should convince us to make climate friendly policies. I suspect you really are just unwilling to sacrifice regardless of any reason - it's a waste of time pretending it's because some higher bar hasn't been met.

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#68

Post by thomascgalvin » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

davidw wrote: post #50

hkt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carbon sequestration is trivial: we rewild destroyed ecosystems. We don't need to die waiting for Elon. I await my downvotes.

The city where I live is considering a tree ordinance, driven by some local NIMBYs. I did some rough numbers based on things I found around the internet and: One year of carbon sequestration from a mature tree == 1 or 2 days of commuting to the city 20 miles away that many people who are priced out of this town drive back and forth from. Trees are great, and most places should plant more street trees. But if you pres…

There is no single silver bullet, but if you combine tree planting with nuclear / renewable power with remote work with electric vehicles ... eventually it starts to add up.

Shooting down solutions because they aren't the entire solution will mean we never make any progress.

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#69

Post by tunesmith » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:41 PM UTC

BossingAround wrote: post #41

hkt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carbon sequestration is trivial: we rewild destroyed ecosystems. We don't need to die waiting for Elon. I await my downvotes.

If we planted trees on every square meter outside of current cities (and let them grow without disturbing them), would that make a dent in carbon sequestration? Serious question. Planting trees and re-growing ecosystems seems like a simple, straightforward solution, but I feel like it's a red herring.

My understanding is it would help quite a lot, and would also not be sufficient by itself to solve the problem.

Too many people jump from "it's not sufficient" to "therefore, we shouldn't do it".

Re: Shell admits 1.5C climate goal means immediate end to fossil fuel growth

#70

Post by pseg134 » Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 4:41 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #40

r3trohack3r wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is where I’m at too. At least as far as I understand it today (leaving this comment in the hope that folks can help me expand my understanding) Life on earth is not stable. We are in the final death throes of this planet. Roughly 75% of life on earth is behind us. Life has been here for 4Bn years and we have about 500m left[1] until our carbon cycles grind to a halt due to the earth moving outside of the habitab…

It seems to me to be incredibly arrogant to be reasoning starting from humanity as saviors of life in 500 million years. And to say that that somehow means that the eco-movements (many of which are focused on the keeping us alive for the next few thousand years) are flawed seems wrong. The focus put on silly Greenpeace actions and fights about nuclear in the media is part of a somewhat intentional strategy to paint a…

Well if someone other than humanity wants to step up and save life I’m sure we would be okay with it but my dog still spends his time licking himself and my houseplants are not especially active so I think it’s up to us.