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

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

resilience.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 356 posts

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

#251

Post by Aerbil313 »

anonymous_2022 wrote: post #196

I never understood why this 1.5-2C global temperature is such a big issue when dinosaurs were living with average 15-20C Earth temperature and much higher CO2 levels (you can just google "world temperature history" or "co2 levels history". There were much more plants, diverse wildlife, etc. Having warm Earth is much better than having an Ice age, right? Also higher CO2 levels mean more ingridients for new trees/plant…

Temperature is not the issue. Rate of change of temperature is. World ecosystem can’t adapt that fast without drastic population drops. Ever heard of overshoot?

https://medium.com/@CollapseSurvival/overshoot-why-its-alrea...

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

#252

Post by slothtrop »

mnky9800n wrote: post #239

climate change isn't a problem of science it is a problem of oppression. It is an unjust decision by the power elites to continue the status quo while hoping some silly valley hoohaw is going to come up with a silver bullet but if not who cares, got mine. It is about stealing from present and future generations. It is about stealing from the poor, people of color who will be displaced by rising sea levels. It is abou…

Emissions rise as a function of demand, mainly from east Asia, particularly China (holding demand constant, emissions would otherwise lower, since combustion technology grows more efficient over time). The homegrown demand rises because we are padding our numbers with immigration to boost GDP (enriching the wealthy, primarily), and newcomers adopt the same carbon footprint as the rest of us, through consumption. They want houses, vehicles, electricity, gadgets, delicious and convenient food too.

The argument has been made that it's inhumane to demand that developing countries (e.g. in Africa, or BRIC) opt to lower their fossil fuel consumption, restraining themselves from improving their quality of life over time. I agree. We benefited, so should they. If it were possible for them to catch up purely on green tech, they would.

Only a fraction of fossil fuel use is actually for generating electricity. The other uses are currently non-abatable, until technology improves. Other uses include blast furnaces for cement and coke, steel-making, creating ammonia, creating plastics. On the electricity front, things are still a mess.

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

#253

Post by WorkLobster »

anonymous_2022 wrote: post #196

I never understood why this 1.5-2C global temperature is such a big issue when dinosaurs were living with average 15-20C Earth temperature and much higher CO2 levels (you can just google "world temperature history" or "co2 levels history". There were much more plants, diverse wildlife, etc. Having warm Earth is much better than having an Ice age, right? Also higher CO2 levels mean more ingridients for new trees/plant…

These questions are tackled in most basic primers that should show up in a google search such as you suggest. E.g.:

https://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/25733/interactive...

> Climate is always changing. Why is climate change of concern now?

> All major climate changes, including natural ones, are disruptive. Past climate changes led to extinction of many species, population migrations, and pronounced changes in the land surface and ocean circulation. The speed of the current climate change is faster than most of the past events, making it more difficult for human societies and the natural world to adapt.

https://www.epa.gov/climatechange-science/frequently-asked-q...

> Why be concerned about a degree or two change in the average global temperature?

> A degree or two change in average global temperature might not sound like much to worry about, but relatively small changes in the earth’s average temperature can mean big changes in local and regional climate, creating risks to public health and safety, water resources, agriculture, infrastructure, and ecosystems. Among the many examples cited by the 2018 National Climate Assessment are an increase in heat waves and days with temperatures above 90°F; more extreme weather events such as storms, droughts, and floods; and a projected sea level rise of 1 to 4 feet by the end of this century, which could put certain areas of the country underwater.

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

#254

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

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…

Maybe mandate twice as thick wooden frames - that would capture more carbon in the house walls, and also conserve heating, as wood is a good insulator?

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

#255

Post by billwear »

climate change is also affected by the amount of swamp we replace by concrete. here in the Louisiana wetlands, the amount of CO2 that the environment can "sink" is enormous, but the wetlands are shrinking every day for more refineries and pipelines and.... there's a balance we haven't found and don't want to find. rich people apparently don't really care about their grandchildren.

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

#256

Post by lelanthran »

candiddevmike wrote: post #8
slashdev wrote: post #3

I’m not sure what’s the point of focusing on 1.5C anymore. I think the writing on the wall is pretty clear that we’re going to double that at least. Barring any miracle in carbon sequestration technology anyway. I hope we get a miracle.

Our kids, who will shoulder far more of the effects of this than us, didn't get to choose this. This is their inheritance, generations of neglect for the environment and rampant profiteering culminating in a climate catastrophe.

You make it sound like out generation chose this.

No, we didn't, just like our kids didn't.

We didn't choose shit, we took what we were given while a small minority in a minority of countries chose this.

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

#257

Post by NickC25 »

rektide wrote: post #235
legitster wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, let's not overrate the lobbying of the Oil and Gas industry. They don't even crack the top 5 sources of lobbying dollars in the US. They are there right alongside lobbyists for solar and wind and nuclear and etc. (And let's also not set aside that most of the oil extracted in the world is not done by private companies but by government ventures). And again, their lobbying is a drop in the bucket as to their a…

Open secrets lists oil & gas at $123 million/year of lobbying, #8th highest spender #3 highest spender is insurance, at $158m, #2 electronics at $221m, pharma at #1 $373m. I too think we have to try to be reasonable, & there's a lot of factors, and it's hard. They are a gigantic lobbying force, quite close to top 3 though.

Right - my point exactly. $123m a year is serious coin. A few puff-piece PR releases saying "we're going green! yay us!" are pennies in comparison.

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

#258

Post by intrasight »

NikolaNovak wrote: post #85
intrasight wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A recent piece in The Economist argued that China is doing more to combat global warming than is any other nation, and if America is going to do better then we'll have to become more like China. I agree on both points. And I think that will be the outcome eventually.

That's fascinating, especially considering the source - do you have a link by any chance?

I just looked but I can't find it. Is possible it was in another publication.

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

#259

Post by scythe »

digging wrote: post #176
scythe wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is going to sound kind of cynical, but the primary mechanism of democratic — popular — feedback, in most countries around the world, is embarrassment. In the West, embarrassment means you lose elections; in less democratic countries, it may mean you get forced from power by other means. So the optimal climate target should maximize the utility of this embarrassment. It should not be too achievable, or countries…

I'm not sure if you're familiar with American politics, but embarrassment is not a factor for roughly half our politicians. They can literally be child predators, why would their base care if they're destroying the environment future generations, even if they believed it?

>They can literally be child predators

Whatever particular incident you're referring to, the evidence was not released in a straightforward fashion, but tricked out through document drops and the partisan media, so that the pols could avoid a clear public announcement that so-and-so was a pedophile. That's exactly consistent with "avoiding embarrassment"; it just happens that a small fraction — usually, people who were already opposed to that official — believe they should be embarrassed.

When there are clear allegations of CSA, as with Mark Foley, the individual is quickly cast out. When a politician embarrasses their own party, as with Madison Cawthorn, the same thing happens. When the message can be sufficiently contained and redirected, the embarrassment has been avoided.

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

#260

Post by [deleted] »

anonymous_2022 wrote: post #196

I never understood why this 1.5-2C global temperature is such a big issue when dinosaurs were living with average 15-20C Earth temperature and much higher CO2 levels (you can just google "world temperature history" or "co2 levels history". There were much more plants, diverse wildlife, etc. Having warm Earth is much better than having an Ice age, right? Also higher CO2 levels mean more ingridients for new trees/plant…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN