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

Wet-bulb temperature

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 183 posts

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#101

Post by jmcqk6 »

thworp wrote: post #24
studmuffin650 wrote: post #2

in my opinion, a lot of folks won't take climate change seriously until it adversely affects their way of life in such a dramatic way that they cannot deny it any longer. A wet bulb event, occuring over multiple hours, would be that signal. Piles of dead bodies from folks who either were misinformed or weren't able to move to safety would be quite the wake up call.

In my experience the issue is not about taking it seriously, I've rarely met someone totally unconcerned in real life. The real issue is what to do about it, how to do it and in what timeframe. With these wet bulb events and the breathless death counts in the media people get the impression that heat waves are bigger killers than cold winters, when it's the opposite (and if you include indirect and long-term deaths b…

> In my experience the issue is not about taking it seriously, I've rarely met someone totally unconcerned in real life.

The Republican Party just held their first primary debate among the presidential candidates. They were asked about climate change and only one of them was willing to recognize it as a problem, and my understanding is that she directed action towards China and India. The candidate leading the pack, Trump, was not present, but has called Climate Change a Chinese hoax.

If you are not encountering people like this in real life, you are living in a bubble yourself.

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#102

Post by RetroTechie »

pjtn8 wrote: post #35
alangibson wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stopped reading it because the premise is entirely unbelievable. A mass casualty event of pretty much any size would not lead us to do anything about climate change. For evidence, look at the deaths in the USA from gives and cars every year . Yet there is zero momentum toward doing anything about those from a policy standpoint.

A sudden mass causality event triggered 9/11 responses, pandemic response. A heat related mass death event most likely would trigger a response. The real question is would it be organized and tidy response, or civil unrest? When 4% hunt anymore and no one can grow a carrot? Suddenly logistics are interrupted worse than covid because, what, Phoenix burns down? Oh, it’ll trigger a response.

It's a bit different than 9/11 though. Climate change is like a fully loaded supertanker. You can hit an emergency break all you want, but still that ship will have a 5..10km (or longer?) breaking distance.

So if a mass death event were to occur, and policy were to change course drastically, the changed climate would continue to pound our biosphere for many decades (if not centuries). Or hit tipping points and get worse & worse no matter what we do.

To put it blunt: at some point, prolonged mass suffering & death is practically guaranteed. Just with a decades-delayed fuse. That fuse is already lit, while we can't see (with any certainty, that is) how big a powder keg it goes into.

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#103

Post by jncfhnb »

falcolas wrote: post #76
sjducb wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fill a bath and get in it. The groundwater is usually much colder than the air. However there is a limit to how long you can live in the bath.

And how many bath tubs there are per-capita. Many newer homes are built with only showers. You also have to worry about power when it comes to having access to sufficient water to cool a person in the first place.

You do not need to submerge yourself underwater if that’s what you are suggesting. A bucket of water for your feet will do lots. A shower is good too.

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#104

Post by jncfhnb »

generic92034 wrote: post #63
falcolas wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s not THAT hard to cool down even if you’re incapable of sweating to do so. How would you recommend cooling down for hundreds of thousands of people at a time? I have to assume that those affected wouldn't have easy access to AC.

Also, can we all be sure that electricity will be available during such an event?

Heat waves are dangerous. My point is that wet bulb events are not a magical inflection point.

The point to take away is that humidity matters in addition to raw temperatures. Not that there is a specific threshold at which things matter or didn’t matter.

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#105

Post by jabradoodle »

alangibson wrote: post #54
jlmorton wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All life is a trade-off. There has been massive effort at reducing traffic fatalities, representing probably trillions of dollars of investment, including road design and barriers, speed limits, signaling, car safety features like crumple zones, seat belts, air bags, all manner of crash safety testing, enforcement actions, and much more. We haven't entirely banned cars, and carbon emissions weren't totally banned aft…

A massive failure judging by the numbers. Which is my point. We will continue to feel bad, maybe drop in some metaphorical traffic circles, but do nothing to actually solve the issue.

How is a ~24x reduction in deaths per mile driven a massive failure?

What would you call a success? No death, total ban on driving?

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#106

Post by zarzavat »

thworp wrote: post #24
studmuffin650 wrote: post #2

in my opinion, a lot of folks won't take climate change seriously until it adversely affects their way of life in such a dramatic way that they cannot deny it any longer. A wet bulb event, occuring over multiple hours, would be that signal. Piles of dead bodies from folks who either were misinformed or weren't able to move to safety would be quite the wake up call.

In my experience the issue is not about taking it seriously, I've rarely met someone totally unconcerned in real life. The real issue is what to do about it, how to do it and in what timeframe. With these wet bulb events and the breathless death counts in the media people get the impression that heat waves are bigger killers than cold winters, when it's the opposite (and if you include indirect and long-term deaths b…

A “wet bulb event” is not just a heatwave. A heatwave is a sustained period of high temperatures. You can protect yourself from a heatwave by staying indoors, using a fan, drinking water, etc.

A wet bulb event is a period of complete local inhabitability due to the temperature/humidity rising above the threshold where the human body can cool itself by sweating. These events are so far almost unheard of.

Anyone who is in the affected area during such an event would only survive if they had air conditioning and uninterrupted power. Anybody without AC would die, unless they found some non-evaporative way to cool themselves.

It’s the most terrifying natural disaster conceivable.

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#107

Post by abeppu »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #79
allemagne wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it particularly jarring to realize that central banks issuing a carbon-backed cryptocurrency will probably not save us from climate change?

As much as the story centered around central banking machinations, the buried narrative was that a lot of people in power probably have to die. This realization and it's impossibility make the story a tragedy when compared to the real world.

Sorry, why is it an impossibility for people in power to die?

I'm not advocating for violence, to be clear, and in the novel KSM seems to take the stance that at some point violence is really counter-productive. But certainly there have been places and periods in which e.g. targeted kidnappings of rich people, assassination attempts on politicians, and terrorist attacks against high-profile targets have all been around -- why do you think is it impossible for those to be directed at people in power in the future? Especially if there are progressively more climate victims, it seems like we're setting the stage for a generation of people to be ripe for radicalization.

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#108

Post by nocoiner »

wonderwonder wrote: post #87
lukevp wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Temperature and humidity are high enough that you can’t cool off naturally via sweat. I would suspect most people don’t realize that’s even a thing. I’m from Texas, and everyone thinks they’re heat adapted and tries to act macho. A lot of people would just stay outside and keep working, ignoring any warnings they received.

I expect Texas to be the first state to experience a wet bulb event. Its only a matter of time before we get a combination of extreme heat and a massive failure of their power grid. Hundreds of deaths in a single day will lead to... nothing. Same politicians will be voted in and the deaths will just be counted as the price of freedom

We had hundreds of deaths in the span of 2-3 days during the winter storm in 2021. It didn’t catalyze any political change then, so unfortunately I think you’re right about the effect the next time it happens.

I have been surprised by the resilience of the grid this summer. Thank god for solar.

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#109

Post by pjtn8 »

alangibson wrote: post #90
pjtn8 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sighted a problem and cited zero anything else. Pandemic response was effective at avoiding healthcare system collapse and churning out a vaccine. It’s as good a plan as we can get with 30% of 300 million intentionally indifferent, centrists too absorbed in low effort consumerism, and anyone espousing concern being called a tree hugging pussy. What else do you want? Too many seem to think the MCU should hop on sa…

> You sighted a problem and cited zero anything else. Perhaps you missed the analogy in my original between climate deaths and gun+traffic deaths. > It’s as good a plan as we can get with 30% of 300 million intentionally indifferent, centrists too absorbed in low effort consumerism, and anyone espousing concern being called a tree hugging pussy. You're so close to getting it. We will be talking about "sensible soluti…

I do have kids. Which is why your post bugs me.

My whole effort here is throwing your low effort back at you; including your misuse of sighted for cited.

Frankly I think I get you a lot better than you get me. You are your own generalization/analogy/metaphor.

You’re doing nothing substantive while complaining about lack of substantive effort in the part of others.

Functional illiteracy in the raw, dog

Re: Wet-bulb temperature

#110

Post by falcolas »

jncfhnb wrote: post #103
falcolas wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how many bath tubs there are per-capita. Many newer homes are built with only showers. You also have to worry about power when it comes to having access to sufficient water to cool a person in the first place.

You do not need to submerge yourself underwater if that’s what you are suggesting. A bucket of water for your feet will do lots. A shower is good too.

I'm not sure a bucket would be enough to cool a person down if they have no other form of heat dissipation available to them - specifically I'm not sure feet alone could dissipate heat fast enough. If the water is too cold (around 70°F IIRC), your body would constrict the blood vessels to your hands and feet, limiting how much heat could be moved to those extremities from your core.

Hence mentioning a bath tub.

Some interesting reading to go along with this topic:

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19750007244/downloads/19...

Of particular note is the need to remove about 1k BTU/hour when walking/doing light work, and that's only from metabolic heat generation.

And 1 BTU raises 1 pint of water 1 degree, so 1k BTU/hour would raise 5 gallons of water by an unrealistic 25° every hour.

Post reply on HN