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

Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 183 posts

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#71

Post by autoexec »

haltist wrote: post #65
autoexec wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California's "dealing with the problems" seems like a lot of shortsighted non-sustainable policy. Parts of CA are burning right now. At this point they've been bragging about maybe not having to go back to rolling blackouts. Reliably providing even the most basic services like water and power is such an astonishingly low bar that only in the poorest developing nations should that even be in question yet here we are.…

What states do you think will manage to deal with climate change if not California?

I know there have been models to predict which areas of the country are expected to be most/least impacted by climate change but I'm not qualified to judge them. I suspect that increasing heat and desertification will leave much of the southern and western US in very bad shape. Anywhere prone to flooding now will only have it worse. The coastal areas will also deal with flooding and storms in increasing frequency/severity.

Maybe some of the northern flyover states would be best? Higher land around the great lakes for example? If I were looking to buy up some land today I'd even consider Canada, but only after the fires have died down. The only nice thing about wildfires burning 40 million acres of forest to the ground is that it'll be a while before there's enough fuel for it to happen again.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#72

Post by hnburnsy »

haltist wrote: post #31
lkbm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article says: > Boundary positions do not demarcate or predict singular threshold shifts in Earth system state. They are placed at a level where the available evidence suggests that further perturbation of the individual process could potentially lead to systemic planetary change by altering and fundamentally reshaping the dynamics and spatiotemporal patterns of geosphere-biosphere interactions and their feedback…

California's climate patterns are already changing but the state has managed to deal with the problems and will probably continue to do so. Texas on the other hand is starting to see problems with their electricity grid during summers and it's going to keep getting worse as temperatures continue to rise.

One is losing residents and one is gaining. Could that partially explain what you descibed?

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#73

Post by yoyohello13 »

Liquix wrote: post #20

> Clearly, it is in humanity's best interest to... Herein lies the problem. What happens to the environment is not governed by "humanity's best interest", it's governed by whomever has the most power and the biggest stick. These entities act in their own best interest. To the Chinese government, more factories = more money = more power = good. To the US government, more military equipment = more power = good. At the…

I recently came across a game theory term called "Moloch" in which individual incentives lead to negative outcomes for all parties involved. Nobody individually wants the negative outcome, but it's extremely difficult to break out of the cycle.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#74

Post by haltist »

autoexec wrote: post #71
haltist wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What states do you think will manage to deal with climate change if not California?

I know there have been models to predict which areas of the country are expected to be most/least impacted by climate change but I'm not qualified to judge them. I suspect that increasing heat and desertification will leave much of the southern and western US in very bad shape. Anywhere prone to flooding now will only have it worse. The coastal areas will also deal with flooding and storms in increasing frequency/sev…

So it sounds like you don't think most of the US will adapt.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#75

Post by haltist »

hnburnsy wrote: post #72
haltist wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California's climate patterns are already changing but the state has managed to deal with the problems and will probably continue to do so. Texas on the other hand is starting to see problems with their electricity grid during summers and it's going to keep getting worse as temperatures continue to rise.

One is losing residents and one is gaining. Could that partially explain what you descibed?

Seems like that should be even more reason for Texas to upgrade their energy infrastructure like California.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#77

Post by autoexec »

haltist wrote: post #74
autoexec wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know there have been models to predict which areas of the country are expected to be most/least impacted by climate change but I'm not qualified to judge them. I suspect that increasing heat and desertification will leave much of the southern and western US in very bad shape. Anywhere prone to flooding now will only have it worse. The coastal areas will also deal with flooding and storms in increasing frequency/sev…

So it sounds like you don't think most of the US will adapt.

I'd have more faith if I saw a lot more effort being expended. It seems like most places are still pretending nothing will change. People are still buying property that regularly floods even while insurance companies are refusing to cover them. States are selling off their clean drinking water to industries that will waste and pollute it. Important infrastructure is left outdated and crumbling. Environmental protections are being rolled back, fracking and drilling continue.

At this rate, it's looking pretty rough.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#78

Post by toss1 »

analognoise wrote: post #58
myshpa wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the food web One major contributor to the overshoot is our current agricultural practices, with animal agriculture being a primary offender. It's responsible for a significant amount of greenhouse gases, it's a leading driver of biodiversity loss and deforestation, and it contributes to soil degradation and water pollution. https://ourworldindata.org/land-use https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2013/10/World…

Humanity would rather go to war to thin our numbers than give up eating meat. The only viable method is lab grown meat that tastes exactly the same, same texture, and is cheaper. That's it. People have real stuff in their lives - they're not worried about planetary survival in 100 years, they're worried about next months rent, etc.

>>they're worried about next months rent, etc.

If you are actually worried about next month's rent, then going mostly vegetarian is FAR cheaper than eating beef

Plus, only 12% of the people eat 50% of the beef in the US. That is a group of 50-65 year-old men. Change their habits to match the normal population (or let them age out) and 50% of the problem disappears.

[0] https://phys.org/news/2023-08-mere-americans-nation-beef-sig...

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#79

Post by Asooka »

analognoise wrote: post #58
myshpa wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is the food web One major contributor to the overshoot is our current agricultural practices, with animal agriculture being a primary offender. It's responsible for a significant amount of greenhouse gases, it's a leading driver of biodiversity loss and deforestation, and it contributes to soil degradation and water pollution. https://ourworldindata.org/land-use https://ourworldindata.org/uploads/2013/10/World…

Humanity would rather go to war to thin our numbers than give up eating meat. The only viable method is lab grown meat that tastes exactly the same, same texture, and is cheaper. That's it. People have real stuff in their lives - they're not worried about planetary survival in 100 years, they're worried about next months rent, etc.

I definitely would not eat lab grown meat. My own meat consumption is less than 200g per day. I eat one hamburger a month at most, as a treat. I want it to be the best hamburger from the happiest free range cow ever. I'm not going to eat some synthetic imitation, I'll just have bean stew with the occasional piece of chicken.

The way the vegan movement has weaseled its way into the discussion on climate change has been frankly horrifying to watch. As you said, people will not stop eating meat. Tell them that going vegan is the only way and they'll just say "fuck the planet" and not bother with it. Like, the worst that could happen is humanity going extinct. The Earth itself will be fine. Put that way, well, if we can't figure out how to run our farms more optimally, we should go extinct. Chickens don't contribute to atmospheric changes by themselves.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#80

Post by Mountain_Skies »

toss1 wrote: post #61
analognoise wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humanity would rather go to war to thin our numbers than give up eating meat. The only viable method is lab grown meat that tastes exactly the same, same texture, and is cheaper. That's it. People have real stuff in their lives - they're not worried about planetary survival in 100 years, they're worried about next months rent, etc.

Perhaps note that only 12% of Americans eat 50% of the beef. That group is men between 50-66 years old. The remaining half is spread among the other 88%. Convince that 12%, or let them age out, and half the problem goes away. [0] https://phys.org/news/2023-08-mere-americans-nation-beef-sig... Edit: Fixed link — Thx myshpa! (still looks truncated, but seems to work now)

>on a given day

That conditional statement should set your skeptic sense to Defcon one.

Post reply on HN