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

There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 166 posts

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#111

Post by cma »

oceanplexian wrote: post #71
bugglebeetle wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not the GOP, its an entire economic system, defended at nuclear gunpoint, by the one of the world’s largest carbon emitters, who both parties reward with ever-expanding, fraud-ridden budgets, while their citizens starve and die on the streets, go bankrupt from illnesses, etc. I’m sorry to tell you, but there is no one in the halls of US power steering the ship away from the worst outcomes of climate change becau…

> I’m sorry to tell you, but there is no one in the halls of US power steering the ship away from the worst outcomes of climate change The folks who went hard on globalism since the 1990s certainly are. There were (and still are) a lot of politicians on both sides who support unchecked globalization, the ecological and human consequences be damned. This is the cause of Climate Change, not the US, which is ramping dow…

> If China had to meet the same absurd standards as the US and Europe we would be hitting climate goals no problem.

China's per-capita emissions are far lower than both during the time period, even with net manufactured exports.

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#112

Post by myshpa »

dstansby wrote: post #74
jdminhbg wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US carbon emissions peaked in 2000 and have been falling since, even without a per capita adjustment: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/carb... Different politics in the US might have made some difference on the margin in lowering them more, but it's not really the main issue.

> but it's not really the main issue. Isn't reducing CO2 emissions as fast as possible the only issue in town when it comes to the climate crisis?

No, our real problem is "overshoot" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overshoot_(population) ) and the the "Great Acceleration" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Acceleration ).

‘Overshoot’ occurs when humanity consumes bio-resources faster than ecosystems can regenerate and waste production exceeds nature’s assimilative capacity. Overshoot is a meta-problem: climate change; plunging biodiversity; pollution of land, air and waters; tropical deforestation; soil/land degradation etc., etc., are all co-symptoms of overshoot. Climate change is an excess waste problem — CO2 is the greatest waste by weight of modern techno-industrial economies. We cannot solve any major symptom of overshoot in isolation. Indeed, the mainstream approach to emissions reductions will not only fail to subdue climate change but, by promoting material growth, will exacerbate overshoot (https://www.resilience.org/stories/2021-10-29/cop-26-stoppin...).

Almost everything we undertake follows a pattern resembling a hockey stick (https://futureearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/great_acc...), growing exponentially long after we've already surpassed safe boundaries. This has been happening for several decades now, at least since 1970. The carrying capacity of our environment has been deteriorating for decades, and recently, the rate of its decline has escalated. It is on the verge of entering free fall, if it hasn't already (nicely explained here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPb_0JZ6-Rc ).

We should have stopped using fossil fuels yesterday and started changing our diets, reforming agriculture, reforesting, restoring habitats and biodiversity, reforming financial systems, promoting degrowth and implementing UBI to address inequality, etc., etc. Many things need to be done urgently to halt the environmental crisis. Unfortunately, we are not even making significant progress on the changes we have announced.

We are acting too late, our efforts are insufficient. Nobody's truly in charge. COP is a farce, the IPCC has been bought by interest groups. Politicians are not taking decisive action, economic growth remains an obsession.

We are driving towards the cliff at full speed, with nobody at the brakes.

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#113

Post by V__ »

willcipriano wrote: post #105
V__ wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multiple factors. The grid infrastructure isn't always there, the upfront cost is often higher (even if it is cheaper in the long run), production capacities as well as the fact that battery storage is just starting to catch up.

> battery storage is just starting to catch up Wait a minute. I thought solar is cheaper. Now you are telling me they need batteries? I would've assumed that the batteries are part of that cheaper claim, otherwise you wouldn't have power at night at that claim would be very disingenuous. Sounds like the developing world still needs fossil fuels to escape poverty.

Depending on what type of battery you use or how long you want to store it, it can be cheaper or cost competitive. But the same factors apply as well, production capacities are not catching up fast enough. Still, The end of fossil fuels is inevitable, as renewable sectors keep growing. Also, the potential for small nuclear reactors or maybe even fusion could change this even faster.

If politics had backed renewables a few decades ago just as much as they back fossil fuels, we wouldn't even need to have these discussions.

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#114

Post by lotsofpulp »

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #101
lotsofpulp wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is Joe Manchin’s vote more powerful than the other Senators’ votes? If you need 50 or 60 votes to do something, and you do not have it, then is the 50th or 60th vote more powerful than the other 49 and 59? And what about the other 49 and 39 votes that will not compromise? Kind of ridiculous to pin this on a party that has not had enough votes to make a change. Especially when the states making the most progress t…

Manchins vote matters more because it is the tiebreaker that matters.. we have to live in the real world. Here’s some questions: Have Democrats never had the political power to make change? Did the Obama presidency not exist? Let’s be real.. the Dems have explicitly made it a policy to move towards the right in order to appeal to GOP voters. This isn’t just some conspiracy theory, it has been explicitly stated by dem…

It is not the tiebreaker. There are 49 other votes that could also be a tiebreaker.

> Have Democrats never had the political power to make change? Did the Obama presidency not exist?

Correct. They had the votes for 6 months in 2009 in which they passed the most comprehensive reform that I have seen in my adult life, the Affordable Care Act.

> If democrats were as militant about their positions as the GOP, maybe they’d have more than one major liberal policy win made through legislation in the past 50 years.. but they’re not, and they don’t.

Makes zero sense given the numbers of votes needed, but okay. Even the ACA barely had the numbers, which is why it has to be watered down to attract the Republican-lite members to vote with the rest of the Democrats.

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#115

Post by femiagbabiaka »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #114
femiagbabiaka wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manchins vote matters more because it is the tiebreaker that matters.. we have to live in the real world. Here’s some questions: Have Democrats never had the political power to make change? Did the Obama presidency not exist? Let’s be real.. the Dems have explicitly made it a policy to move towards the right in order to appeal to GOP voters. This isn’t just some conspiracy theory, it has been explicitly stated by dem…

It is not the tiebreaker. There are 49 other votes that could also be a tiebreaker. > Have Democrats never had the political power to make change? Did the Obama presidency not exist? Correct. They had the votes for 6 months in 2009 in which they passed the most comprehensive reform that I have seen in my adult life, the Affordable Care Act. > If democrats were as militant about their positions as the GOP, maybe they’…

But see, you’ve already given up the game: The Dems had a supermajority then, there were no compromises that had to be made except amongst themselves. So the Manchins of the party matter. A lot. And it’s not just Manchin — Pelosi up until the end was only two clicks left of him herself. And just like you’re doing now, the Dems use the GOP as an excuse instead of ramming their political agenda through for all of our sakes. The Democrats always have an excuse for why they need to compromise to the right, why their hands were tied and there was nothing they could do, and it doesn’t matter how much they disappoint, some people will eat it up every time.

It’s what allows Biden to call himself the most labor friendly president ever while crushing rail worker strikes. It’s what allows the absolute failure of policy called Obamacare to take up the national conversation. It’s what led to the conservative majority in the court. And it’s what led to the election of Trump, and why he’s still got a shot, even when he’s one foot out of federal prison. Maybe one day the Dems will learn. But not while their base keeps eating up their excuses and sending them money and votes…

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#116

Post by m463 »

myshpa wrote: post #62

https://essd.copernicus.org/articles/15/1675/2023/ We've added the energy of 25 billion nuclear bombs to the Earth system in just the last 50 years. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/climate-change-ocean-heat-new-r... Last year, researchers say, the ocean heated up an amount equal to the energy of five of those bombs detonating underwater "every second for 24 hours a day for the entire year." ... the ocean in 2022 was "th…

I wonder if we could just stop flying planes for a while (which might lead to global cooling, like the days after 9/11/2001)

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#117

Post by theossuary »

JohnFen wrote: post #79
danielovichdk wrote: post #25

The faster humans can get off the planet the better the earth will become. I don't mind all the climate change talk. But I do mind the symptoms curing. The best people can come up with are fucking electrical cars and artificial meat. Because we too many fucking people to serve natural foods. What the fuuuck is wrong with us? I might sound pessimistic but I don't have any faith in humanity as for saving the world. Abs…

> The faster humans can get off the planet the better the earth will become. Long term, the earth will be just fine. The only real question is whether or not it will be a good place for people to live on. Or, as I used to put it: we are causing an imbalance that will be corrected. If we don't correct it, nature will, and nature's methods will be much more cruel than people expect.

Your point reminds me of my favorite guest lecture I've ever seen: https://youtu.be/sI1C9DyIi_8

About 15 minutes in he makes the same point you do.

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#118

Post by lovich »

oceanplexian wrote: post #85
snarf21 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed .. A lot of people will die as places become uninhabitable for a very very long time .. Access to clean water will become a major issue and the poor will lose (even more than they already are) .. Humans are a greedy species and this planet just can't support 8B+ (and counting of us) .. I don't know what it can support but we'll soon find out .. We are still decades away from near zero fossil fuels globally and…

> Humans are a greedy species and this planet just can't support 8B+ This seems like a pretty bold statement. Let’s assume the only constraints on population are energy, water, and space. If you do a back of the napkin calculation on much Uranium exists on Earth, how much power we could produce by fissioning it, then how much water is in the oceans, and then assume everything else is an engineering problem? I think t…

It’s a political problem first. You can’t engineer your way out of a problem when most of the people holding power or the resources needed decide to not spend the time or money because they think it’ll affect others and not them

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#119

Post by luxuryballs »

july21 wrote: post #23
kardianos wrote: post #7

[flagged]

I've been on this site for years and just created an account for the first time to ask if you will please consider that the entire body of climate scientists and climate experts and all known empirical evidence disagrees with your one possible explanation, the "ethical skeptic." If you would like to learn more, here are some reliable resources that will explain how climate change has been working, and how it will con…

pretty sure there are climate scientists who disagree, and we know that “all known empirical evidence” clearly does not agree… but I am curious, do you have any frame of reference for why you think these are reliable sources?

Re: There’s a heatwave in the sea and scientists are worried

#120

Post by hedgehog »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #99
hedgehog wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending what all the other effects you describe do to food production and communicable disease spread "we'll all be dead" may be only a moderate exaggeration of the effect over say a century or two.

That's my point, without more information that doesn't make sense: 1. I don't doubt disruption in global food production will likely cause some famines, but again, plenty of places will still be able to grow food, and in fact many places will open up to food production. 2. I don't see how any increase in communicable disease spread leads to anything close to "we'll all be dead". Yes, lots of people will die due to th…

As we are under more pressure due to all the factors you pointed out the odds that we are able to avoid spread of a highly contagious virus with a higher fatality rate than COVID (closer to say MERS) or a series of big famines (say 1% of global population) start to look uncomfortably lower than 100%.
Post reply on HN