Live data from Hacker News

Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

twitter.com

171–180 of 581 posts

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#171
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you played Dungeons and Dragons? It's not supposed to be fun as a place to really live, living in a land harassed by monsters, demons, no security, etc. It's an interesting scenario to explore creativity and conflict in difficult situations.

Sure, but imagine if a D&D setting was an actual world that somehow survived long enough to start implementing countermeasures (remember the last 1/3rd of this book is set thousands of years in the future, so reasonably analogous). If the Player Characters decide they don't want to bother with a problem, it would have to be solved with other methods, like massive use of defoliants (think agent orange) and pesticides,…

You're right, I had assumed some kind of general peace for the resettlement of the surface of the planet. Given that, there would be some lawlessness, but at least no orbital strikes/nukes.

I was more thinking about various types of agents from the people living in space, all infiltrating each other, traitors to their own types, double agents, weird combinations etc. Plus mysterious people nobody can place - who turn out to be agents from the submarine/hot air balloon groups. And vice versa.

The land is now mostly open and clear, right? So there will be new populations, settlements being started down on the surface. A resource race, with possibly high-tech stuff lying around, relics from the lost civilization!

Player characters could start off as an alleged group of "explorers for sites for new cities" put together by a newly established base - but actually one is trying to divert them away from the hidden holy site of the mineshaft people, where he came from, the other is a spy from a lost faction of the brain people who are outlawed in space now, another is trying to fulfill a 5000 year family promise he received from his father, that when he could, to go to a certain place and say a certain prayer, etc.

There is just huge diversity of backgrounds and tech, and a large, unexplored environment potentially full of strange treasures!

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The “scandal” was they were hiding evidence of cooling. If you don’t remember, read the article. Look at who promoted it. Literally no one promoting that bullshit believed that models were underreporting the effects and causes climate change.

The hiding of cooling was implied in the problems in the data/models. It’s a moot point really, the scientists did some dodgy stuff, whether they were exaggerating warming or hiding cooling doesn’t make much difference to their integrity.

How could cooling be implied from climategate leaks, when climategate deniers where saying "There is no relationship whatsoever between human activities and climate change."?

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is like my relatives who voted Tory because immigrants are taking their benefits away. Only to enter old-age with the Tories taking their healthcare and their benefits away. These are tragic and self-defeating people. It doesn't mean they aren't stupid or dangerous to the rest of us. Or that they aren't responsible for the consequences of their own actions. But that they do stuff which is illogical, self-ha…

If you think criticising a model for not matching observations is illogical, then I don’t think you have a very good understanding of logic.

[deleted]

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Global overpopulation is absolutely a part of the equation, and everyone is deeply uncomfortable talking about it because there are no palatable solutions to that specific problem. Humans, as a species, exhibit all the damaging properties of a cancerous growth, and our habitat can no longer support us. As George Carlin said: the planet will be fine, it’s the humans that are fucked!

The solution is well understood: universal education and readily available birth control. It's already working in the more developed economies.

That this is a solution remains to be seen. Does this result in net negative population growth? The evidence seems to suggest it does. Will it result in a sharp enough decline in total population numbers fast enough to mean anything? That seems unlikely.

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a bit out of the loop here, but is the letter "X" a part of Elon's company branding? Since that's not the first time he used the letter "X" in that manner. The single letter "X" is brimming with symbolism and implications. Without further explanation we may never know why the rebranding was necessary.

He made his fortune with x.com. That was the online bank he founded then merged with Confinity to become PayPal in 2000, and it was the PayPal IPO that allowed him to invest in Tesla and SpaceX. He's fond enough of his old company name that he bought the domain back years ago, and is now repurposing it.

Thank you for the thorough explanation! For the longest time I thought he was a founder of Tesla and Space.

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#176

The enthusiasm with geoengineering among the HN community is worrisome. Not sure which computing analogy would drive home the complete recklessness of this mentality but the Earth is not something you can reboot to the last working state once you harebrained patch implodes. It is true that we have been slowly geoengineering for ages (initially unwittingly, recently with eyes wide open) and it is also true that our mo…

> Not sure which computing analogy would drive home the complete recklessness of this mentality

Geoengineering is an act of desperation. Its like your laptop is on fire, so you throw some water on it.

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quip: But when the patient's temp is high enough, everyone in the ER knows that you gotta go straight to the ice-water bath. How many square miles of solar reflector could each Starship launch carry to a stable-ish region near the Earth-Sun L1 point?

Reflectors act as solar sails and hence need a fuel supply to stay put.

They need active guidance systems. Being solar sails - with a competent design, they can be trimmed (small portions of the sails moved with electric motors to adjust the forces from the sun) for station-keeping.

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#178

The enthusiasm with geoengineering among the HN community is worrisome. Not sure which computing analogy would drive home the complete recklessness of this mentality but the Earth is not something you can reboot to the last working state once you harebrained patch implodes. It is true that we have been slowly geoengineering for ages (initially unwittingly, recently with eyes wide open) and it is also true that our mo…

> refrain from aggravating the situation

I used to think this way, but after years of trying I don't think getting people to change their life habits is going to happen.

At this point I think geoengineering is necessary. At the very, very least, carbon sequestration at scale is a fairly safe form of geoengineering if we can pull it off.

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#179
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The models have underpredicted the temperature rise throughout my entire living memory. Even the "pessimistic" scenarios of high-temperature-rise have been blasted right through on a yearly basis. The model is drastically, dramatically understating the natural feedback loops involved and the amount of temperature rise that's going to happen. Feedback loops like methane release are likely also hugely understated, as a…

> The models have underpredicted the temperature rise throughout my entire living memory. This doesn't seem historically true. They seem more or less on point with some overshooting and some undershooting: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-m...

It’s a good summary but I don’t think the data actually support their conclusion that “While some models projected less warming than we’ve experienced and some projected more, all showed surface temperature increases between 1970 and 2016 that were not too far off from what actually occurred.” +/- 15 % over the last 3 IPCC reports is a lot of missing energy. The models are getting better but I don’t think matching 50 year trends that are essentially linear proves that they are accurate for long term forecasting.

I’d be interested to see a new comparison for this years heatwave. I don’t think models would fare as well.

Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures

#180

The enthusiasm with geoengineering among the HN community is worrisome. Not sure which computing analogy would drive home the complete recklessness of this mentality but the Earth is not something you can reboot to the last working state once you harebrained patch implodes. It is true that we have been slowly geoengineering for ages (initially unwittingly, recently with eyes wide open) and it is also true that our mo…

We don't have any other choice.
Post reply on HN