Reduction of sulfur emissions from ships may be causing rising sea temperatures • Hacker News Board

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

#431

Post by llsf » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:05 PM UTC

atoav wrote: post #226

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 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,…

THIS! As we will grasp the effective impact of the past century of burning fossil fuel, we will first go in denial, hoping for a technological miracle.

While there might be a way to produce 84% of the energy currently used without involving fossil fuel, it would not reasonably be implemented in the next decades.

So, we might have to change the way we live. The sooner we adapt, the less painful it would be. If this is not for the climate, it would be as we reach peak oil/gas/coal.

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

#432

Post by BurningFrog » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:05 PM UTC

marcosdumay wrote: post #94

cubefox wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are people saying we should not just not stop, but even increase sulfur injection: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratospheric_aerosol_injectio... The thing is, this is not a one time solution. We would have to do it continuously, or else the temperature would quickly rise again. And we would have to increase sulphur injection if the CO2 level keeps rising. It could be a temporary solution though, e.g. until al…

To be fair, if we did mostly stop fossil fuel exploration and emissions right now we would get a quick reduction of antropogenic warming into some 80% to 90% of the current amount in some 4 decades due to some fast-degrading gases that are not CO2. That said, we won't stop fossil fuel exploration and the related emissions, so yes, it's temporary.

Fossil fuels are being replaced pretty fast, but it will be several decades before the transition is complete.

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

#433

Post by majormajor » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:08 PM UTC

atoav wrote: post #226

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 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,…

> 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.

This seems like a euphemism for "a lot of people 'have' to die" - when phrased that way it becomes obvious the reason that many will search for active measures to take to try to prevent that.

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

#434

Post by shawnz » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:15 PM UTC

jjallen wrote: post #324

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.

We all have a responsibility to be the strongest possible advocates of our own opinions

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

#435

Post by vel0city » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:18 PM UTC

kaba0 wrote: post #351

fasterik wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

We have enough resources to provide heating and running water for every living person on Earth, it is just not allocated fairly and smartly (e.g. in my country we flush the toilet with very good grade water meant for drinking, because historically we don’t have separate piping for less potable water and we are rich in waters). But do we really need to be able to order some bullshit plastic shit from China for 2 dolla…

> Hell, most liquids meant for drinking could easily come in a few sizes of these reusable bottles

Oh how I wish I could just bring a reusable bottle to some dispenser at the store and refill directly. Milk, common juices, soaps, etc. So many bottles going into trash/recycling all the time.

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

#436

Post by gregoriol » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:19 PM UTC

zagrebian wrote: post #406

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…

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.

It's good that he presents it in a way that is interesting to many; but it would be better if he was more accurate in saying that it is interesting but not something new we just found out though

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

#437

Post by AJRF » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:19 PM UTC

I'd wager a lot of money we've not seen that last of humanity screwing around with the climate in well-intentioned but bad-outcome ways.

Is there a name for this phenomenon of harmful actions because by an "increase" of understanding of the underlying system?

I imagine there are similar outcomes in many areas, politics, economics, code bases. Kind of like requiring helmets (protect personal health) for cycling leading to less cyclists (poorer health outcomes for a population)

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

#438

Post by ironmagma » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:23 PM UTC

sz3 wrote: post #170

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…

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…

Doing nothing is itself a risk. Better to think of it as risk in every direction, all we can do is use what we know from science to choose our exit from the roundabout.

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

#439

Post by vel0city » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:24 PM UTC

CalRobert wrote: post #394

concordDance wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While some meat eating being required for nice food is subjective, I'm struggling to see what the suggested alternative to cars for all weather personal mobility is. I want to go to visit my friend Bob who lives 10 miles away but the rain is pouring down. What do I do in a carless world? Btw: CO2 emission taxes, road taxes and congestion charges are a great idea.

Trams or buses to your friend Bob's flat or rowhouse would be helpful here.

Statistically speaking in the US Bob doesn't live in a flat or rowhouse.

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

#440

Post by kjkjadksj » Sat, Aug 05, 2023, 4:24 PM UTC

gjulianm wrote: post #334

fasterik wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

> while putting a substantial portion of GDP into building nuclear reactors and removing carbon from the atmosphere. The first thing takes years and we still don’t have feasible technology for the second. Not to mention that we would still have a lot of emissions from transport, manufacture, and meat consumption. A technological silver bullet would be cool but the reality is that we don’t have one and there’s nothing…

Growing up biomass is a good way to eliminate carbon from the atmosphere. You can build or make product from the biomass, or even just throw it into a deep ocean trench.