Live data from Hacker News

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

twitter.com

471–480 of 581 posts

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

#471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone came to you with a problem on a project, and you had a hard deadline of the end of the week, and you had two ways to go about it - 1) this is gonna be a pain in the ass to implement, you'll all be pulling 12 hour days but it's straightforward and crystal clear in how this directly addresses the problem, and 2) some completely unproven solution, that even when fully implemented the math/logic doesn't really…

It’s a very bad analogy because we have no know working solution. We simply have never achieved zero carbon emissions given a modern world of 8 billion people.

We certainly do have a known solution to emissions, it’s to cut them. The most straightforward way to do that is to cut consumption, drop standards of living.

The solution is crystal clear, we have real life working examples right now all over the world, for example the people living in Bangladesh are at a level of consumption that would actually be sustainable for all 8 billion of us to embrace.

The solution is clear, it’s just that we don’t like it, so we readily embrace the magical thinking that we can have our cake and eat it too.

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

#472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, if climate change really was an “emergency”, mitigation would be extremely cheap. With big side effects. Nevertheless if it really were an emergency … in real emergencies, triage happens, and downsides are taken for granted. Thankful that there’s no real emergency yet, but I suspect governments will drag their feet long enough that there will eventually be one, and then emergency relief will be deployed anyway,…

Think of climate change like a car driving off a cliff. The car is “safely” on solid ground until it isn’t. The problem is that at some point to avoid the emergency you need to hit the brakes or turn, and this particular car might not be able to turn or brake very hard without catastrophic effects on the occupants. Moving away from this metaphor, there is a possibility we cross a tipping point in the climate system (…

those who believe we will hit a discontinuous tipping point are precisely those who should be advocating for geoengineering now, despite its unknowns and downsides… yet the voices to do so are curiously absent

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

#473
post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But none of the examples you give move the needle enough with regards to climate change. You're just following what feels like it would be good for the environment (and maybe it is good for your local environment) but isn't actually impactful at a large scale. You write eloquently, but futilely.

I think it's not meant to be an exhaustive list of things to do. Instead, what if it's a mindset: Doing such things, and 1000 others, some of them vastly more important than others. And you can add to the list (instead of just saying "it won't work"). E.g. high car gas taxes, so there'll be trains, buses and bike lanes instead for everyone.

> Doing such things, and 1000 others, some of them vastly more important than others.

That doesn't make any sense why would we make sacrifices that are not important.

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

#474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just unreasonable to suggest people not visit their friends within the same metro area

If a bit of rain would stop you then that says a lot. I bike thousands of km per year and get caught in the rain frequently, it doesn't even factor into the decision of whether or not I will go because when you bike a longer distance in NL the chances of getting rained on approach certainty.

i don't think a disinterest in cycling for 45 minutes in the rain each way says anything negative about me. i have a bike and use it when it makes sense. that doesn't make sense

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

#475
post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

We absolutely do not. We have a responsibility to seek out the truth and act in the interest of the common good. Quite often this means NOT strongly or blindly advocating our own opinions when our knowledge is incomplete or motivated by self-interest. Many times our responsibility is to advocate someone else’s opinion or present multiple options. I have many many opinions and very few of them would benefit from my st…

Why would you hold opinions that you don't think would benefit from your strongest advocacy? Why believe things yourself that you don't think other people should believe?

To be clear, I'm not saying that you should strongly advocate for other people to strongly believe things that you only weakly believe. But you should strongly advocate for other people to weakly believe those things. Furthermore, I don't think strong advocacy implies closing your mind to differing opinions. You can be a strong advocate for your current viewpoint while also being willing to change your mind.

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

#476
post #425
post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

But none of the examples you give move the needle enough with regards to climate change. You're just following what feels like it would be good for the environment (and maybe it is good for your local environment) but isn't actually impactful at a large scale. You write eloquently, but futilely.

Futility becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy way too easily to let it persuade one not to do what one thinks is right

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

#477
post #454
post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We came from a history of mostly starving, struggling for survival, dying of infections, dying during childbirth, being illiterate, and having little shelter or comfort. I think this nostalgia for the past is a golden age fallacy that needs to die. Technology has vastly improved human life and taking it away is essentially a call for reducing the standard of living for everybody. The past wasn't sunbeams and frolic…

Without modern, western, industrial technology 50% of all people die before reaching adulthood: https://ourworldindata.org/child-mortality-in-the-past This is reproducible across time, geography and culture. It is the basic condition of humanity. > I invite you to visit basically any place on Earth that is not Europe or North America. It's frankly a white/western superiority complex and technology is just a fig leaf…

> As an aside, I'm very disturbed to realize this screed is coming from someone of your stature in the tech community.

Oh geesh. As if the lines of code I have written are what I put forth to vouch for this. We should divorce the tech fantasies from the meatspace realities. My opinions are based on the many, many, non-tech days that I've spent roaming the Earth[1] and have seen what humans as a whole are really up to. I've spent a whole lot of time picking up garbage off beaches and roadsides and over the course of my short life have already seen the forests and fields of my youth get gobbled up by Lowes's and Burger Kings and endless, endless sprawl and greed. When I see a hundred acres of corn get sold off for 6 million bucks and the only thing that is built on it is a gas station, it dawns me that it's just another transaction in a long, long line of trading what was here before for the now--forests, trees, raccoons, foxes, wolves, beatles, ants, birds, bees, all...woosh. I guess tomorrow it'll be a solar/wind-powered datacenter and we'll all pat ourselves on the back. But we're fruits or flowers on the tree of life, and we're sawing its branches off.

What I find disturbing, but not really surprising, given how virtualized and fake our worlds and imaginations have become, just how blinkered the tech sector is, as if exponential growth is going to continue forever and matter and energy are just going to suddenly take up our growthism mindset and help us boost our fever dreams of...what...a hundred billion people on Earth? Or of 8 billion Elon Musks whisking around the planet on private jets? I honestly don't know what people expect. The exponential curve would naturally become an S curve at some point, but unfortunately we aren't aiming for that. We've already overshot, and the reservoir we are drawing down will eventually run dry, and that's a brutal, brutal crash.

And if you take my opinion for advocating any fascist-sounding, eugenics-sounding, kill-the-baddies-sounding recommendation, then you're reading something in I didn't write. Like if pointing out we're headed for a cliff turns into an argument about the two options: magically sprout wings or all of us cut our legs off the knees. It's a total non-sequitur and binary thinking.

[1] And yeah, it's true that I've been able to roam said Earth because of tech that's been invented in the last 50-100 years. And yes, I am lucky. And yes we are having this conversation because of tech, and yes, I don't feel great about the unsustainability of the lifestyle that all of us, including me, live.

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

#478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yeah, we should fix that

Loads of people don't want to live in flats and row houses though.

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

#479
post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>far fewer people Also bluntly: how would we do that ethically without severely restricting reproductive rights or "cleansing" populations?

What part of birthing billions of children into poverty was ethical again?

Struggling for survival is the natural condition of living beings on this planet. What's unethical about birthing children in poverty exactly?

Rich people consume orders of magnitude more resources than poor people so if anything it's unethical for rich people to have children.

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

#480
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…

The same climate models that predict a "missing" volcanic eruption? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1808_mystery_eruption

These volcanic eruptions haven’t been predicted, we found evidence of them in ice cores
Post reply on HN