91–100 of 296 posts
Countries stock up on masks to prepare for future pandemics. What can/do they stock up on to prepare for extended heat waves? Ground water reserves? Generators and fuel? Underground shelters?
This is why I think we should be seriously considering atmospheric aerosol injection already. Not sure why there aren't more large government funded studies of this.
Before we start filling our atmosphere with theoretical solutions, shouldn't we reduce as much of emissions and consumption and possible? We humans consume an insane amount of natural resources. We have built many of our societies around global interdependence. We produce a constant flood of stuff that is consumed quickly and discarded. We could make a big impact simply shifting to more local economies. For example,…
Cold kills more people according to the literature [1]. Heat deaths are rising, cold deaths are falling. Not in the same places though. Countries near the equator are going to suffer more than countries at higher latitudes. Demand for air conditioning is expected to more than triple by 2050 (consuming as much electricity as all of China and India today). [2] [1] https://www.thinkglobalhealth.org/article/hot-cold-and-…
Which further exacerbates the problem. Another unfortunate feedback loop for us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the temperature being described here is extremely lethal within hours even to heat-adapted people.
While you're correct, I suppose that people who live in already warm areas with high humidity to tend to build more resistance, and would be the "last to die" compared to people from, say, Europe.
The last to die will be the people who are most harmful to the environment on a per-capita basis. Before then, you’ll have socioeconomic disruption in warm countries, creating masses of people fleeing to cooler climates, creating political openings for xenophobes and unsavory characters throughout the western world who will take it as a key goal to preserve our right to pollute, now return to step 1, cycle repeats and amplifies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I grew up poor and without AC in Minnesota where we regularly get spells of 100°F+ (37.7°C) at VERY high humidity thanks to all the lakes. It’s survivable, it’s absolutely not pleasant though and I wouldn’t wish it on anyone. Fans and wet rags help some. I used to fill a 2-liter bottle with cold water and hold it against my chest. A lot of sleepless nights. When we got a local second run $2 movie theater, it was a li…
The point is that at some sufficiently high humidity, fans and wet rags do not help any more, at all ! Combine that with sufficiently high temperatures, and it's not survivable. And will kill people with weak circulatory systems (i.e. the elderly and babies) quite a bit earlier.
A friend of mine who lives in Queensland (Sunshine Coast) was talking about a recent spell of 32° and 100% humidity and how oppressive it was. My understanding is that such weather is not survivable long term [1] without air conditioning. A power failure would be disastrous. [1] https://www.psu.edu/news/research/story/humans-cant-endure-t...
This is the plot of the Ministry for the Future [0]. Power failure during a prolonged wet bulb temperature above 35°C, millions of dead. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ministry_for_the_Future
The grid is going to have to undergo huge evolution, but increasingly corruption and political gridlock make that unreliable.
Plus home solar empowers you from centralized control and functions as the only free market alternative to the regulatory captured grid infrastructure.
Home storage with sodium ion and hopefully in 2-4 years sodium sulfur will drop costs 50%.
Also, your car an function as a secondary battery storage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or the hysteria was overblown, and we instead sabotaged an opportunity for many of the people living near the equator to become more prosperous.
> an opportunity for many of the people living near the equator to become more prosperous Please tell us, what you have in mind. More economic growth?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We can build passive structures to regulate peak temperatures - caves and windowless insulated boxes with high thermal mass, for instance. As long as the average temperatures (day and night) over a few days or a week are survivable, active cooling isn't strictly necessary. Survival is a consolation, but if we need to start living in caves and windowless insulated boxes, then those are not very reassuring news...
But we managed to deliver a lot of value to shareholders before then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do not understand the issue at hand. Whatever you experienced was way less severe, because evaporative cooling obviously was still possible. There is a point where you simply cannot cool yourself passively. That's the point where survival is at risk regardless of health. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet-bulb_temperature
Having a rag of cold water on you will cool you regardless of evaporation. It is a thing that is cooler than the environment. The water from our taps at least is a pretty constant like 50°F
Do you think this is the case for the billions of people closer to the equator or in poorer countries?
This is why I think we should be seriously considering atmospheric aerosol injection already. Not sure why there aren't more large government funded studies of this.