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

#351

Post by hackerlight » Wed, Apr 26, 2023, 11:28 PM UTC

nradov wrote: post #330

hackerlight wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If we crash the economy You're assuming that a drastic response to stop climate change will crash the economy more than climate change itself will, which is a highly dubious proposition given that many countries (e.g. Denmark) are case studies that show the feasibility and relative ease of the transition (relative to climate change itself).

Denmark hasn't done much significant about climate change. Like many other wealthy countries their efforts have been more about symbolism and political virtue signaling without addressing the core issues or making any drastic changes. Much of their food, energy, and other products is still produced using fossil fuels in foreign countries and then imported. To be clear, I think that every country should do more and so…

Well I agree with some of what you said, Denmark hasn't done nearly enough, but they have done quite a bit, and they aren't any closer to an economic crash after that than they were before it. This leads me to doubt the claim that addressing climate change will cause a crash, let alone a crash as bad as what would be expected if the IPCC assessments come to pass.

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

#352

Post by tiborsaas » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 6:28 AM UTC

hackerlight wrote: post #351

nradov wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denmark hasn't done much significant about climate change. Like many other wealthy countries their efforts have been more about symbolism and political virtue signaling without addressing the core issues or making any drastic changes. Much of their food, energy, and other products is still produced using fossil fuels in foreign countries and then imported. To be clear, I think that every country should do more and so…

Well I agree with some of what you said, Denmark hasn't done nearly enough, but they have done quite a bit, and they aren't any closer to an economic crash after that than they were before it. This leads me to doubt the claim that addressing climate change will cause a crash, let alone a crash as bad as what would be expected if the IPCC assessments come to pass.

It's quite a stretch to pick Denmark with excellent geographic conditions, great economy and surrounded by similar wealthy countries to point out that if they can do it, then surely everybody else can too without significant consequences.

I mean, we could stop CO2 emissions "tomorrow" if we really wanted to. We just need massive investments in tons of infrastructure, stop building with concrete, convince people not to travel, etc. Which - now as I type this - sounds like COVID lockdown to me which we still haven't recovered from fully. Even minor shifts in trends have cascading effects in the economy, so I'm not surprised at all, that things are going so slowly.

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

#353

Post by maerF0x0 » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 7:57 PM UTC

vharuck wrote: post #209

maerF0x0 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO What we're consistently failing to see is that necessity is the mother of invention. Mankind has summoned seemingly unfathomable ingenuity and effort in response to dire need. It seems it will be Gen Alpha/Beta who will have their "ww2 moment" but in response to existential threat from Environmental and second order societal collapse. Likely changes will include mass adoption of nuclear (potentially including Fus…

>It clearly wont be the end of mankind, just mankind as we currently experience it. Cold comfort if the new experience will be an economic crash and global food shortage. And you're assuming that, once things are terrible enough that political and economic powers can no longer ignore climate change, there will still be available solutions to have something better than a life of war and hunger. Cities have fallen to d…

> Climate change won't be.

While I agree there will be some delta nearly every where, I disagree there will be a life ending delta every where. It's worth noting I'm talking about this very stoically. It will be horrific either way.

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

#354

Post by nobody9999 » Thu, Apr 27, 2023, 10:24 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #345

nobody9999 wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>While the government may not explicitly state that "you must use cars" if you take a look at state transportation department budgets, for example, you'll see that the funding is all for cars. We could split hairs and say it's not a "mandate" but I think it is effectively a mandate and if you asked, most politicians would say something like "Americans love their cars and freedom" which means "we support car-only infr…

Thanks for the post and I don't disagree with your assessment on how the term "mandate" is used. It's just the closest word I could find at the time to describe how I view the current state. I know the governor for example doesn't come on the TV and say thou shalt drive but the budget and actions do show otherwise. I'm not even sure voters are effectively engaged here either. It's like the saying it's easier to destr…

Sorry for the late response.

Point taken. As I said, aside from that particular word choice, you're spot on.

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

#355

Post by courgette » Fri, Apr 28, 2023, 4:08 PM UTC

piuantiderp wrote: post #329

courgette wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hope you have property near a cost, any cost.

It has been, perfectly fine. I've seen it all, starting with global cooling in the 70s, then warming, then cooling, then change. It's a convenient lie to get many people to have less kids which arguably is a good thing. If you look at the ice, the trend is not quite evident. It comes and goes https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-04-06/this-wint... Worry more about the solar minimum in 2030, take your precauti…

I don’t see the part about coming and going in your linked article.

It states that the ice coverage is at the lowest since 79 since we started to survey it from space.

But it’s probably fine yeah. That ice probably just go somewhere else, not in the giant body of water supporting it.

Thought and prayers!

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

#356

Post by blooalien » Thu, May 04, 2023, 1:58 AM UTC

wkat4242 wrote: post #331

runarberg wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, when I stated: “We are all going to die!” I meant it as a hyperbole. I actually don’t believe a literal total extinction of the human species is a likely scenario (even in a +4° horror scenario; even with a nuclear holocaust on top of it). “We are all going to die” is more of a you and me are personally very likely to die because of climate inaction, or at the very least, our lives will suffer, and th…

I understand, I just objected to it because I see in my environment that there are seriously people thinking now that climate change can be a human extinction event (though it will be for many other species of course) There seems to be a 'project fear' movement that thinks it's ok to overblow scientific conclusions in order to sway people to act. I personally think this is a very bad idea as deliberate lies will only…

I honestly don't believe "climate change" in and of itself will kill us all off (although there's always that possibility, depending on tipping points and other factors). I'm more worried about how the humans in control of some of the deadliest killing technologies ever devised are gonna exacerbate an already horrifying future as things progress and ever more tension is created by the situations climate change will bring about. Humans (as always) are the scariest part of the equation.

I hold the same worries about A.I. The tech itself (currently just a tool, and honestly not nearly as "advanced" one as many seem to believe) isn't nearly as scary as how the dumbest of our number (our so-called "leaders") are gonna use and / or abuse it.

I honestly believe that if there is a true extinction of humanity (or life in general) on this planet, it's far more likely that a small group of exceptionally stupid humans will inflict it upon us than almost any other "doomsday scenario" I can imagine.