[dead]
Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
411–420 of 581 posts
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#412The 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…
This is precisely why we shouldn’t dismiss skeptics about the cause of climate change as “climate change deniers.” Its clearly maligning - someone who doesn’t deny the climate is changing is obviously not a climate change denier.
If we don’t understand all the variables we’re probably going through make things worse. Given how complicated weather and climate are and how are models are not perfect, that seems inevitable if we embrace geoengineering.
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#413Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
>far fewer people Also bluntly: how would we do that ethically without severely restricting reproductive rights or "cleansing" populations?
>Also bluntly: how would we do that ethically without severely restricting reproductive rights
Exactly. The dismantling of Roe v Wade in the US comes to mind as a form of severely restricting reproductive rights.
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#414The 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…
More people should upvote your post. If there is a rank of how easily humanity can destroy itself and make the earth uninhabitable for itself geoengineering is probably second only to thermonuclear war. Also I object to the use of the term geo-engineering. Engineering supposes we know exactly what the outcomes will be following centuries/decades of experience with similar systems. Including many failed experiments. T…
[deleted]
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#415Climate 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…
If Hank was less excited about it, the video would not reach nearly as many viewers, so from an educational perspective, he’s succeeding at educating many more people about this topic. It matters less when we “figured this out”. The educational value is in the details.
And there absolutely is a need to sensationalize.
This is a big problem and requires serious political will, whether to pull off mass cloud seeding, make more sun/nuclear energy or reduce the usage of something important like air travel or heating.
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#416Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no alternative. We have "aggravated the situation" (as you put it) beyond recovery. Doing nothing will now surely lead to an unacceptable outcome. We are going to have to fix it, or resign ourselves to a huge shrinking of the habitable region of the planet, with the hunger/famine/war that will accompany that. Obviously we can always make things worse. But when doing nothing is unacceptable, we have to start…
You have absolutely no idea if the "solutions" we try won't lead to even worse outcomes. Up until the point climate change is becoming an existential threat, which it isn't yet, we shouldn't go doing anything too drastic. There is plenty of evidence that we can still avert the worst of it without resorting to geoengineering.
> You have absolutely no idea if the "solutions" we try won't lead to even worse outcomes.
This is absolutely untrue.
The mechanisms of how SO2 in the stratosphere cools the planet are well understood and empirically observed.
This includes the fact that it breaks down in ~2 years, making it self repairing, should something unforeseen happen.
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#417X's threads make even less sense now unless you think everyone you want to reach is on X. Also, just what a dumb name.
Where else would they put it to reach more people?
He also made a YouTube video on this
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
>There is plenty of evidence that we can still avert the worst of it without resorting to geoengineering. And zero evidence we will...
This kind of defeatist attitude doesn't help with the situation at all. We can all do our part in reducing our daily carbon emissions, raise awareness, and educate policymakers and business stakeholders on the importance of mitigating climate change!
It's important to understand that reducing carbon emissions doesn't cool the planet. It only makes the future warmup slower.
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#419The 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 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,…
I’m pretty sure there’s no chance that people in aggregate are going to voluntarily reduce consumption - on the contrary, the billions in developing countries are moving toward the western lifestyle, and they’re not going to accept westerners trying to tell them not to. We have to work to make this lifestyle sustainable by making clean power, cement, steel, synthetic fuel, etc cheaper than the polluting alternatives, because hoping that we’ll reduce our way out of this is wishful thinking. We need to get to negative new carbon, not just less carbon.
Re: Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures
#420Earlier 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…
> But that's not a satisfying answer for people who have made the climate crisis into a religious issue.
Complete with language about believers and non-believers