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

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

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 581 posts

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

#321

Post by nologic01 »

HPsquared wrote: post #252
nologic01 wrote: post #156

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…

I suppose it comes down to a judgement of how reliable the models are. In this case the models of what happens after applying the "patch".

The degree of confidence in our abstractions of reality is usually a visible process: You are able to explain things you can measure with increasing accuracy, you can predict and verify the unfolding of what-if scenarios etc.

One thing that we should not refrain from is applying 10x, 100x, 1000x the brainpower to understand objectively (as in: not captured by short-term interests) what sustainable biospheres look like and how things can go wrong.

The capacity and orientation of the scientific apparatus (universities, research centers etc) is a WIP that has been shaped by momentous historical events (WWII in particular) and societal choices. I think the sustainability transition is of far greater importance but it has not yet had a visible impact. There are a few new fields (e.g. industrial ecology) but its a slow process.

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

#322

Post by krisoft »

nostrebored wrote: post #167
nologic01 wrote: post #156

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…

The more radical geoengineering ideas, like deflecting sunlight from space, are truly potential extinction level events that should be regulated out of existence. This should not be some VC funded endeavor.

> This should not be some VC funded endeavor.

How would it be VC funded? Where would the return on investment hypothetically come from? If you could produce localised effects while being able to turn them on or off then maybe you could charge for it as a service, but is that at all realistic?

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

#323

Post by matsemann »

fasterik wrote: post #311
matsemann wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you're saying "new carbon emissions", of course those are coming from developing countries. It's not the same statement as I said. And of course they should be allowed to improve their quality of life. My point is that an average HNer lives in a country where per capita co2 per person is >10x as much as the poorer countries. And since the average HNer is a well off person with a lavish lifestyle, international…

Carbon emissions per capita is going down in developed countries. It's going up in developing countries. Your implication was that the current problem is the level of consumption in the richest countries. But in reality that only accounts for a small portion of the expected carbon emissions over the next century. We don't need to "cut back" to a sustainable level. A sustainable level is whatever amount of energy we c…

You're kinda proving my point. Instead of facing reality as that would mean changes to your lifestyle, you want to keep on going as if nothing is happening and just hope technology will save us.

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

#324

Post by jjallen »

zith wrote: post #214

Climate models take this into account [0], contrary to what some people here seem to imply. It is also very likely that this is part of, but not the major factor of recent warming. [1] I would like to point out that this is not something we're just figuring out "this week" as Hank Green seems to want to frame it. There's no need to sensationalize. There is no conspiracy here. This is well known. It's good to educate…

yeah unfortunately if some people are click-baity it makes it where basically everyone has to be if they want to maximize their views/revenue on YouTube.

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

#325

Post by jacquesm »

fasterik wrote: post #305
atoav wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is very uncomplicated in fact: Most people here on HN are rationally capable of understanding the challenges humanity faces right now. What many aren't capable of is accepting the conclusion that we all have to change the way we live and quite possibly even the way we organize society in order to mitigate the irreperable problems our way of living has already caused. Deep down they might suspect this is necessary,…

>That is why discussions around such technological silver bullets are always toxic: people want to believe. On the flip side, some people reject technological solutions on principle because for them, it's not about solving problems, it's about atoning for the sins of humanity. What does the alternative future look like where we solve the climate crisis by changing the way we live and organize society? Personally, I w…

Bluntly: far fewer people, sustainability built into every process, no more oil, very high cost for transportation unless it is by ship, personal transport will be very costly and you won't do it unless you really have to. Think '1850' but with transistors.

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

#326

Post by fasterik »

matsemann wrote: post #323
fasterik wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carbon emissions per capita is going down in developed countries. It's going up in developing countries. Your implication was that the current problem is the level of consumption in the richest countries. But in reality that only accounts for a small portion of the expected carbon emissions over the next century. We don't need to "cut back" to a sustainable level. A sustainable level is whatever amount of energy we c…

You're kinda proving my point. Instead of facing reality as that would mean changes to your lifestyle, you want to keep on going as if nothing is happening and just hope technology will save us.

My argument is that your point isn't based in reality. How is changing my lifestyle going to fix the problem when most of my power consumption is fueled by renewables, while most of the carbon emissions over the next 50 years are going to come from India and China?

I'm not saying keep going as if nothing is happening. I'm saying the climate crisis is a real emergency, and the solution is to build more renewable energy and remove carbon from the atmosphere.

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

#327

Post by matsemann »

fasterik wrote: post #326
matsemann wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're kinda proving my point. Instead of facing reality as that would mean changes to your lifestyle, you want to keep on going as if nothing is happening and just hope technology will save us.

My argument is that your point isn't based in reality. How is changing my lifestyle going to fix the problem when most of my power consumption is fueled by renewables, while most of the carbon emissions over the next 50 years are going to come from India and China? I'm not saying keep going as if nothing is happening. I'm saying the climate crisis is a real emergency, and the solution is to build more renewable energ…

Because while your "power" consumption is mostly renewables (again, you arguing against something slightly different than what I write), it's a small part of your total consumption. What about all the power China uses to build the things we in the west consume? That's on your budget.

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

#328

Post by krisoft »

brabel wrote: post #227
steve_adams_86 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t know. My province in Canada is experiencing anomalous weather events year after year, and while things still look “okay” we seem to be encroaching on visible threshold events quite rapidly. Sure, these events could mysteriously stop. Or stay very much the same, acting like a new normal that isn’t so destructive as to be an emergency. But the trend line is there. Fires increasing, biodiversity decreasing, floo…

> If that’s not an emergency, what is? You know it's an emergency when the status quo is completely unacceptable and the government takes drastic measures (no more cars of any kind on the road, every physically able man/woman forced to work on whatever solution is chosen to help, that kind of thing - nothing close to what we're seeing today) with widespread support of the population. You can't call it an emergency wh…

> You know it's an emergency when the status quo is completely unacceptable and the government takes drastic measures

So if we never acknowledge it it is never an emergency?

> every physically able man/woman forced to work on whatever solution is chosen to help

Doing what? How will the physical power of the masses help us here?

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

#329

Post by benhurmarcel »

fasterik wrote: post #279
matsemann wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially since HNers mostly are the top top top earners in the world, having unsustainable lifestyles. No one likes to accept it can't be like this forever.

This doesn't seem right. Most of the world's new carbon emissions are coming from developing countries. On the other hand, the HN crowd is much more likely to live in dense cities (which are more climate friendly), have access to public transportation, drive electric cars, and can afford to pay for carbon offsets. The only thing unsustainable about the first world lifestyle is the fact that we don't have the politica…

CO2 emissions per capita (tons/person/year):

Canada 18.72

United States 15.32

China 7.44

Brazil 2.24

Indonesia 2.02

India 1.89

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

#330

Post by ChatGTP »

tmpX7dMeXU wrote: post #276
nologic01 wrote: post #156

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…

It’s almost like this website is full of people that let Silicon Valley money trick them into believing they are Gods amongst men and that knowing how to write software grants them some sort of transferable expertise.

We’ll we now refer to ourselves as hardware running on software so it would stand to reason that everything is just a few build pipelines away.

I personally think in the future this idea will be severely dated but it’s in vogue right now.

Post reply on HN