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

The concurrence of three climatic events

climatecasino.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 408 posts

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#311

Post by q1w2 »

Ancalagon wrote: post #272

A lot of comments deriding this article as alarmist. Excuse me if I'm incorrect in saying so, but even the data seems to tell me that alarmism is where we are at: This articles data. Incredible floods in Pakistan. Heat domes over the PNW. Fires in Australia, Canada, California. And now a warming event in the North Atlantic unlike any other. All of that and this is likely to be one of the coolest summers for the remai…

Climate Change is a real threat, but listing individual weather perturbations as data points is like giving personal anecdotes as evidence of societal changes.

The strongest and most accurate evidence for global climate change are GLOBAL indicators, such as sea level rise, global average temperatures, etc...

Every weather event you list, can probably be countered with a mild weather event somewhere else. It's mock science, and it's the most obvious sign of hyperbole.

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#312

Post by idlewords »

callmeal wrote: post #295
idlewords wrote: post #52

As this post hints at in the discussion of sulfur emissions at sea, all it takes to significantly slow global warming is one country or sufficiently motivated non-state actor deciding to go all-in on geoengineering (like seeding the stratosphere with sulfur dioxides). Compare this to the collective action problem of everyone, including rapidly industrializing poorer countries, spending trillions to decarbonize their…

I don't think people watching their cars rust before their eyes will go over well. Did we forget acid rain already? 1991 was not that long ago. https://www.nytimes.com/1991/11/09/news/new-paint-new-cars-a...

This is about stratospheric SO2, the stratosphere by definition doesn't mix (on short timescales) with the air we park our cars in.

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#313

Post by idlewords »

e44858 wrote: post #197
idlewords wrote: post #52

As this post hints at in the discussion of sulfur emissions at sea, all it takes to significantly slow global warming is one country or sufficiently motivated non-state actor deciding to go all-in on geoengineering (like seeding the stratosphere with sulfur dioxides). Compare this to the collective action problem of everyone, including rapidly industrializing poorer countries, spending trillions to decarbonize their…

Sulfur dioxide + water + oxygen = sulfuric acid, which is not something you want in the atmosphere where rain clouds form.

Rain clouds don't form in the stratosphere, and there's very little water there.

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#314

Post by idlewords »

OrwellianChild wrote: post #218
idlewords wrote: post #52

As this post hints at in the discussion of sulfur emissions at sea, all it takes to significantly slow global warming is one country or sufficiently motivated non-state actor deciding to go all-in on geoengineering (like seeding the stratosphere with sulfur dioxides). Compare this to the collective action problem of everyone, including rapidly industrializing poorer countries, spending trillions to decarbonize their…

In which idlewords basically cites the plot of "Termination Shock" by Neal Stephenson... :-)

Please don't make me read another one of his books. I'm still recovering from the Seveneves fiasco.

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#315

Post by [deleted] »

concordDance wrote: post #177
vichu wrote: post #12

I fear that this is the year "wet-bulb temperature" becomes a term regular households across the world become deeply familiar with. It may be as ubiquitous as the term "social distancing" became. I've always naively thought that climate disaster was still 10-20 years out, but it seems like it's going to begin in earnest now and instead be completely catastrophic after these next 10 years. What can I as an individual…

Unless you live in the select few poor equatorial countries with high humidity and heat you have little to worry about personally. Climate change is a long term problem. We're going to see hundreds of millions of climate refugees before the end of the century, but the bulk will be after most of us are dead.

[deleted]

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#316

Post by deanCommie »

black_puppydog wrote: post #279
idlewords wrote: post #52

As this post hints at in the discussion of sulfur emissions at sea, all it takes to significantly slow global warming is one country or sufficiently motivated non-state actor deciding to go all-in on geoengineering (like seeding the stratosphere with sulfur dioxides). Compare this to the collective action problem of everyone, including rapidly industrializing poorer countries, spending trillions to decarbonize their…

You do realize that even if it might work, and even if there weren't any other side effects like acid rain, this would essentially make every piece of sky on every day hazy. We'd essentially trade the very concept of "blue sky" for a livable temperature. Kinda hard to put a price on that for me. Maybe I'd prefer living with genuinely less comfort but blue skies.

> Kinda hard to put a price on that for me. Maybe I'd prefer living with genuinely less comfort but blue skies.

If all you have to trade off is comfort, maybe you can't.

If you were one of the literal HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of people who are living in parts of the world that could become unsurvivable in the next few decades, or get flooded by rising sea levels, you'd have a different perspective.

For what it's worth, I agree with you that reckless geoengineering could easily cause more harm than good. But aesthetically desiring a blue sky is a bit silly when up to a billion human lives are on the line (and that's a low estimate)

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#317

Post by dredmorbius »

tonymet wrote: post #81

if someone can explain how global temps are measured and weighted i’ll give you a cookie

The source listed by TFA for SST, surface sea-water temperature, is https://climatereanalyzer.org/clim/sst_daily/>

From the note on that page:

The page provides time series and map visualizations of daily mean Sea Surface Temperature (SST) from the NOAA Optimum Interpolation SST (OISST) dataset version 2.1. OISST is a 0.25°x0.25° gridded dataset that estimates temperatures based on a blend of satellite, ship, and buoy observations. The OISST data product includes SST anomalies based on 1971–2000 climatology from NOAA. The datset spans 1 January 1982 to present with a 1 to 2-day lag from the current day. OISST files are preliminary for about two weeks until a finalized product file is posted by NOAA. This status is identified on the maps with "[preliminary]" showing in the title, and applies to the time series as well.

Which further references https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/optimum-interpolation-sst>

can haz cooky plz?

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#318

Post by dredmorbius »

hammock wrote: post #143
guerrilla wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dount it'll help you much to move. We've got drought and fire here in Sweden already. Never rains anymore. Slaugherhouses fullbooked already becauae the probability of being able to keep the livestock fed and watered looks pretty bad already...

>Never rains anymore Sweden average rainfall seems to be trending up on a 100-year scale. https://tradingeconomics.com/sweden/precipitation > We've got drought and fire here in Sweden already Forest fires in Sweden are a complex dynamic and the risk factor from climate change is only one part. Here is an interesting discussion https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10113-020-01718-2 Droughts in Sweden have been o…

Keep in mind that "drought" can be highly relative and short-term.

For regions which have historically experienced frequent (e.g., daily or weekly) rainfall, even a few days or weeks with no or limited precipitation can induce stress on ecological communities. Deluge / drought patterns (see California's long-term drought and this past rain season's endless atmospheric river storms) actually compound the problem.

Looking at long-term averages alone may well mask this effect and its significance.

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#319

Post by connorgutman »

selimthegrim wrote: post #215
connorgutman wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an emotional response and not a scientific one. The Haber–Bosch process was the biological equivalent of a deferred-interest loan. It gave us enough food to scale from 2 billion to 8, but now the planet is coming to collect its dues. We never had the natural resources to support humanity's current numbers, and by inflating our Nitrogen supply and stripping the Earth of everything else we need, we've utterly f…

Hasn’t all of technological progress been paying one credit card off with another?

Yes, but more specifically, all technological progress since the industrialized revolution. Prior to that, we at least had a reasonable credit limit in the form of a fixed Nitrogen cycle. Advancements in pre-industrial technology primarily made life easier, not more abundant.

Re: The concurrence of three climatic events

#320

Post by ldhough »

monknomo wrote: post #160
Convolutional wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> every normal weather event San Francisco and the PNW being covered by smoke every summer is not a normal weather event, and now it is starting on the East coast. The east and southeast is also being hit harder by hurricanes, and they are not stopping at the Gulf of Mexico any more. These are just the events people have been able to see in the US in past years and they're not normal and with ever-increasing carbon o…

I feel like for US folks to take climate change seriously requires that climate change directly impact NYC and Washington DC so that the media and policy makers can have some lived experience. Smoke in SF or Seattle doesn't seem to move the needle for whatever reason

I live in DC, the haze from the smoke was crazy a few days ago.
Post reply on HN