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

91–100 of 183 posts

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#91

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

bombcar wrote: post #44
lastofthemojito wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At the executive level of either organization one would be laughed out of the room for suggesting environmental issues should take priority over national security Supposedly some folks are starting to frame climate issues as threats to national security. It may just be lip service so far, but we're now seeing "Meet the Climate Crisis" listed as one of the top 5 priorities for the US Department of Defense: https://w…

I’m always extremely suspicious of “we care about climate charge” arguments that always argue for exactly what the group has always wanted to do.

The Green Party comes to mind. They pushed for the shuttering of German nuclear plants and ended up increasing CO2 emissions.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#92

Post by carlosjobim »

Eduard wrote: post #57
swader999 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No kidding, but to say that climate change did this when hurricanes have been on the decline the last thirty years is misleading. This is weather and engineering failures. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24268-5

> No kidding, but to say that climate change did this when hurricanes have been on the decline the last thirty years is misleading. This is weather and engineering failures. > https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-24268-5 This HN user categorically and obsessively has their own opinion on climate change, and how it is influenced by humans. Their "evidence research" is taking the first Google search result that t…

Do you understand how creepy it is of you to go digging into other users comment history and posting about it when there's a disagreement on a topic? Maybe let the arguments speak for themselves? We're not supposed to be some kind of commissars looking for dissidents or witch hunters looking for heretics.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#93

Post by ifdefdebug »

Asooka wrote: post #79
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.

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 bee…

> My own meat consumption is less than 200g per day

You think that is little? 200 g per day would be 80000 tons of meat for a 400m population (EU) - let's generously account for the less hungry babies and we'd maybe have 60000 tons.

How many cows and pigs are we talking about here daily?

> The Earth itself will be fine.

Sure. Earth will be fine even if we are hit by a megathingy that rips apart the entire lithosphere. Nature will be fine even if our sun blows up tomorrow. But what has that to do with anything?

PS My own meat consumption is down to 2-3 meat dishes per month. Don't know if that helps...

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#94

Post by vlz »

commandlinefan wrote: post #45
dr_dshiv wrote: post #28

I don’t know why this triggers such skepticism in me. Particularly the section on novel entities. But it feels funny, somehow, and I can’t put my finger on it.

> why this triggers such skepticism I know it does for me - because the people who claim to believe in it the most don't actually live their lives as if they actually believed it. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy to do whatever I could reasonably do to create cooler summers and less smog, but I've never heard any actual concrete proposal beyond "vote democrat".

Ok, I will bite. Concrete proposals for anybody regardless of political view:

* Eat half the meat you do or less

* Don‘t fly unless absolutely necessary

* Get on a plan for renewable electrical energy if possible

I know, far from everything in this topic is about consumer choices but a lot really is. If you don‘t want the nanny state to fix your problems you can start at your own doorstep.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#95

Post by gravitronic »

ribosometronome wrote: post #84
apsec112 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions isn't military, it's for ordinary consumer uses like heating, cooling, driving, and farming meat. No matter what the form of government, lots of people will object very strongly if the solution to climate change is not having central heating, cars, hot water, or beef for dinner.

Does renewable power and hydrogen/electric vehicles not solve essentially all of what you listed, save beef?

There's other significant issues, such as concrete.

Read Bill Gates' "how to avoid a climate disaster" for a complete rundown, with receipts.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#96

Post by ifdefdebug »

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)

> let them age out

Doesn't work. A long time ago I thought when all the old farts are gone, everything is going to be better. Had to have faith in my own generation right?

You know what happened... Humanity just grew a new set of old farts.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#97

Post by twobitshifter »

vlz wrote: post #94
commandlinefan wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why this triggers such skepticism I know it does for me - because the people who claim to believe in it the most don't actually live their lives as if they actually believed it. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy to do whatever I could reasonably do to create cooler summers and less smog, but I've never heard any actual concrete proposal beyond "vote democrat".

Ok, I will bite. Concrete proposals for anybody regardless of political view: * Eat half the meat you do or less * Don‘t fly unless absolutely necessary * Get on a plan for renewable electrical energy if possible I know, far from everything in this topic is about consumer choices but a lot really is. If you don‘t want the nanny state to fix your problems you can start at your own doorstep.

The flying thing is weird. It’s really that you emit a lot because you traveled so far. It’s more efficient that driving per mile and slightly less efficient than rail (not sure the type)

https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2015/09/evolving-climate-...

So it should be don’t travel so far and if you have to, take a train and if there’s no train, carpool, but fly rather than drive if you are traveling alone.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#98

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #91
bombcar wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m always extremely suspicious of “we care about climate charge” arguments that always argue for exactly what the group has always wanted to do.

The Green Party comes to mind. They pushed for the shuttering of German nuclear plants and ended up increasing CO2 emissions.

They pushed for the shuttering of something they considered (and consider) an existential risk to life on the planet, and believed that movement towards renewable electricity generation would occur relatively quickly (which is now starting to happen, but did not happen as fast as they believed it would).

You can call it a failure of judgement, but it's not what was claimed in the GP.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#99

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

gmuslera wrote: post #42
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…

Another flavor of the Tragedy of the Commons. Everyone optimized by their local, short term priorities.

And another opportunity for me to point out that there is no such thing as the Tragedy of the Commons. Garrett Hardin, who popularized the term, has walked it back, and others, as long ago as the 1990s, have pointed out with a wealth of evidence that the popular conception of "the Commons" never actually existed. More or less all "pooled" resources in human cultures have historically been carefully managed by a variety of cultural, social, political and economic systems. The so-called "Tragedy of the Commons" happens not because typical individuals over-use the resource, but because specific individuals violate norms, actively work to dismantle management processes and willfully work to utilize the resource for their own benefit to the detriment of others.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#100

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

ifdefdebug wrote: post #96
toss1 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)

> let them age out Doesn't work. A long time ago I thought when all the old farts are gone, everything is going to be better. Had to have faith in my own generation right? You know what happened... Humanity just grew a new set of old farts.

This, and so much this. "The hope of the world is in our generation". No, it really isn't. Any given generation is, statistically, a lot like every other generation (certainly over spans of 4-6 generations).
Post reply on HN