201–210 of 247 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You aren't going to "stop eating beef" your way out of this. Addressing climate change requires technical solutions that result in clean energy that is cheaper than carbon emitting sources (in reality, not just due to regulations).
Solar is far cheaper than other forms, despite he US subsidising fossil fuels and taxing solar
If you’re wondering who to blame, as little as ten years ago: “Republican Senate environment chief uses snowball as prop in climate rant”[0] It’s an interesting plot twist in Termination Shock, where the popularist right shifts overnight from “it’s fake” to “real, but the liberals/globalists/experts betrayed us by doing nothing useful”. A reframe from environmentalism into grievance politics, which is already becomin…
USA is around 18th country in CO2 emissions per capita, and has reduced emissions per capita around as much as the combined EU since 2000, or a little more. Can't see how some random politician is "to blame", that's pretty absurd claim, and not supported by the claimed evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> people having children well below replacement levels You do realise that the global population is still increasing? While birthrates are falling, we aren't even predicted to hit the peak for another half-century. Even pessimistic estimates put it in the 2200s before we fall back to current population levels. Which is ~100 years longer than current estimates give us before the effects of climate change starts taking…
I too am curious as to why that is the feature they are concerned about. As I recall there was a UN survey that found financial security was the most common reason for adults across the globe to choose not having children. Income levels are highly dependent on the degree of stability and monthly expenses that households can expect.
Outside of "great replacement" types who are worried about the continued supply of purebred aryans, I'm not really sure why anyone would be concerned by this
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The word abstraction does not mean the same thing as the words analogy or comparison.
Yes absolutely. They are different things . I am using "level of abstraction" in a sense to find a useful amount of details to drop or keep, which in turn makes an analogy/comparison possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Climate change also greatly increases the chance of a huge global conflict breaking out.
It might raise the chance of some conflicts (e.g. over Antarctica or Russia's border) and some land grabs, but I cannot see it leading to a world war.
So: you have two nuclear powers who are both relying on the same diminishing resource to feed their people. Do you not see how that could cause....tension?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The wealthy prefer fossil fuels because a mine or an oil well is and always has been a massive wealth concentrator. lots of wealthy people are anti-fossil fuel. > Build a solar farm and it... just produces electricity. it needs land. It increases the value of land. Wealthy people own lots of land. The main objections for switching to wind and solar are variability in output and the cost of building all the new stuf…
> lots of wealthy people are anti-fossil fuel. They're really not. Or it's just perfrmative environmentalism. Because they continue to support to politicians and the system that maintains the status quo. > Fine if you are Spanish. Please read the whole paragraph. Transmitting power, which is what UHVDC lines are for and something China builds to transmit power thousands of kilometers from the Western half of the coun…
There are a lot of wealthy people spending serious money on lobbying against fossil fuels:
https://spectator.com/article/revealed-the-shady-funding-of-...
> Europe loves importing electricity. It's the key to greenwashing
Yes, its also a potential problem transmitting .
> The UK has spent hudnreds of billions of pounds subsidizing electricity that goes straight into the pockets of the shareholders of natural gas companies and private utilities.
It has spent a lot of money subsidising wind power. The UK has hugely cut its CO2 emissions. https://ourworldindata.org/profile/co2/united-kingdom
Why is it that aggressive climate action is not taken still?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I too am curious as to why that is the feature they are concerned about. As I recall there was a UN survey that found financial security was the most common reason for adults across the globe to choose not having children. Income levels are highly dependent on the degree of stability and monthly expenses that households can expect.
It's probably also worth mentioning that nobody predicts birthrates to fall indefinitely - the human race isn't just going to die out because multi-child families are less common. Instead we expect that as affluence becomes more evenly distributed, the whole thing will stabilise at a lower population (and ideally one that leads to less competition for natural resources) Outside of "great replacement" types who are wo…
That is what stood out to me as well, but I could be doing them a disservice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keep in mind total emissions grew much much faster in our lifetime (let’s say 1980-2026) than in the prior 200 years, which was before most of the recent huge growth in Chinese and Indian emissions. Also the ocean and arctic were absorbing the majority of the heat. The arctics been going through these heat waves for 10 years, its white albedo decreasing and potentially permafrost melting making more effective emissio…
What action will you take to ensure next year it's only 85F?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem wasn't caused by air conditioning, it was caused by burning fossil fuels. Perhaps we could find a way to have air conditioning without burning fossil fuels?
Obviously. But as of now, AC means burning carbon (~50% of Europe's electricity production). Demand for even more electricity may accelerate the transition, hopefully, but right now the projection is that all the extra capacity and much more will be taken by data centers and consumer electricity bills are going to double or triple. Hopefully that will never actually happen but who knows. Obviously consuming even more…
Source? Where I live (NL) the electricity prices are very low on the days/times you’d need AC because of all the solar power generated then. I think you gotta back up your claim that 50% of electricity consumed by ACs comes from burning carbon. It strikes me as very counterintuitive (or dated)