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

The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

currentaffairs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 212 posts

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#151

Post by aziaziazi »

_luci_ wrote: post #63
GJim wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't have a pet cat or dog. Owning an unnecessary carnivorous animal is rather bad news from a CO2 perspective. A dog can be responsible for higher CO2 emissions than a car. https://impact.ed.ac.uk/research/climate-environmental-crisi... https://www.zerosmart.co.uk/post/the-average-carbon-footprin... (Que outrage from pet owners and people suggesting I'm a crazy vegan.... I'm most certainly not vegan or veggie!)

So we should not own pets, because the real polluters (companies) are lobbying to keep polluting? What bothers me so much about this idea of individual responsibility is that we get blamed for a choice we couldn't possibly make. It is up to the people in power to start making change, and it is important that people vote and educate themselves, but IMO this idea of individual responsibility for societal problems like…

There's multiple vegan brands for dogs and cats feed. If it looks "unnatural" I suggest some reflexions:

    - Most kibble's ingredients are not naturals
    - Most of the kibble's flesh comes from a non-natural production
    - Your pet health (and your own health) require some "nutrients" instead of "food types"
Agree 100% societal decisions are more important than individual ones. However the choice in question could be made as it's not doing (pet ownership). Don't take it personal, OP is not telling you what to do or blaming anyone but instead share some data. As you said: enjoy your life :)

PS: price-wise they tends to be in the premium range. If your cat already has allergies and special kibbles for that, vegan kibbles are in the same price range and are particularly good for that condition.

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#152

Post by tejohnso »

yorwba wrote: post #82

I wondered where this article got the idea that "half the planet" would die "in 26 years or less" with 3°C of warming. It appears to be a misreading of the table in https://actuaries.org.uk/media/ni4erlna/planetary-solvency.p... "Figure 12: Planetary solvency risk impact and likelihood definitions (illustrative)" qualified by "A risk impact matrix is a methodology for ranking potential impacts, not a prediction or ce…

The report does include a >50% human mortality extreme category and the author of the article is referring to a separate report suggesting 3°C is much more likely than expected. I think it's pretty reasonable to think that an extreme climate would cause extreme mortality. The report is pretty confusing to digest.

But because you think that particular consequence is overstated in the article, you're suggesting that the article itself is a lie? The title refers to the lie that we still have more time and that we don't need to get to work immediately to address climate change. It's about the overall lackadaisical attitude toward the climate emergency.

You seem to be suggesting a dismissal of the article's core message.

So, are you suggesting that we actually have plenty of time to deal with climate change, and that things like "Net Zero by 2050" correctly convey the severity of the situation?

What is your assessment of the current year number of deaths attributable to climate change, and expected number of deaths at a 3°C above baseline global average temperature?

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#153

Post by gumby »

I guess time zones are driving a significantly US-centric response. My company works on climate repair. We're just a four person menlo park startup so far with some pilots in the field but we have a couple of billion in our sales pipeline, entirely based on people who have sought us out. Global spend on climate doubled last year and is on a tear this year. Recent events, from the closure of the gulf of Hormuz to the huge fires in Europe have stiffened peoples' resolve.

Sure, the US cut spending since early '25, but even before those cuts, the US was less than 8% of global spending on climate intervention. But it's destructive: though we're based in the US, there is no commercial interest in the states and all our pipeline is outside the country.

Climate denialism is extremely destructive, but it's pretty much entirely a phenomenon of USA, Russia, Germany, Netherlands, France, UK, Canada, and Australia (crudely ranked by % of population), plus of course some gulf states. One of our three founders is an anthropologist and her field work has found that hardly anyone outside the top of the OECD has any doubt that the climate is changing and affecting them directly.

There's not enough happening but the derivative feels strongly positive.

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#154

Post by rickydroll »

alexk307 wrote: post #145
yorwba wrote: post #82

I wondered where this article got the idea that "half the planet" would die "in 26 years or less" with 3°C of warming. It appears to be a misreading of the table in https://actuaries.org.uk/media/ni4erlna/planetary-solvency.p... "Figure 12: Planetary solvency risk impact and likelihood definitions (illustrative)" qualified by "A risk impact matrix is a methodology for ranking potential impacts, not a prediction or ce…

Not to mention that if we limited access to fossil fuels today, billions of people would be dead within months. If we turned off the spigot, billions would starve and civilization would collapse quicker than you could say climate change

You're right that we can't limit access to fossil fuels today. We can't do it without a substitute energy source. We know from practical experience that replacing fossil fuels with electricity is the best option for heating and cooling buildings, water, and food.

I believe the next stage is big ass batteries to soak up excess energy production for later use and to let us work with what we have today, both in generation and grid wiring. Residential and maybe commercial big-ass batteries could reduce the need to rewire buildings for higher energy devices.

This would reduce the overall use of fossil fuels and make it available for all the things necessary to preserve human life, while making a serious dent in slowing down climate change.

At the same time, we need to tout the environmental benefits of solar farms, such as increasing biodiversity, preserving soil moisture for agrivoltaics, and reducing the stress of climate change on livestock. These will also require big ass batteries for soaking up the excess production of these solar farms.

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#155

Post by inigyou »

Ekaros wrote: post #24
ericmay wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And let’s also not forget, we all want the climate crises fixed, but nobody is willing to personally make any changes to their lifestyle! All parties are incentivized against fixing this problem.

That is fundamentally the problem with whole thing. Vast majority of population on Earth is not ready for personal sacrifices needed. And if some government will get to around it, I am pretty sure they will be replaced and most things are rolled back. My guess is that we somehow end up geoengineering it with even more debt...

The majority of the population on earth goes with what's convenient. Which is something that can easily be influenced, even without banning any options

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#156

Post by antisthenes »

geertj wrote: post #99

Sadly I think the only solution is to invest to build more energy infrastructure and more AI, so that in the future when the shit really hits the fan we have enough energy and assistance from AI to create a scalable technology to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere proactively. In my view there is no credible future in which the world will become carbon neutral in 1 or even 10 years. It just ain't happening. This is one o…

> so that in the future when the shit really hits the fan we have enough energy and assistance from AI to create a scalable technology to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere proactively.

> In my view there is no credible future in which the world will become carbon neutral in 1 or even 10 years. It just ain't happening.

So we're going to skip becoming carbon neutral and go straight to carbon negative, because...magic, I guess?

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#157

Post by lioeters »

qsera wrote: post #133
lioeters wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best kind of propaganda is when people believe they're "thinking on their own" while repeating some convenient lie to keep the grift going. If you think that doesn't apply to you, then it's working as designed.

At least I am falling to the best kind of propaganda. While the other side, who does not apparently even believe they're "thinking on their own", is falling to a much poorer one...

And nobody learned a thing.

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#158

Post by geertj »

antisthenes wrote: post #156
geertj wrote: post #99

Sadly I think the only solution is to invest to build more energy infrastructure and more AI, so that in the future when the shit really hits the fan we have enough energy and assistance from AI to create a scalable technology to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere proactively. In my view there is no credible future in which the world will become carbon neutral in 1 or even 10 years. It just ain't happening. This is one o…

> so that in the future when the shit really hits the fan we have enough energy and assistance from AI to create a scalable technology to pull CO2 out of the atmosphere proactively. > In my view there is no credible future in which the world will become carbon neutral in 1 or even 10 years. It just ain't happening. So we're going to skip becoming carbon neutral and go straight to carbon negative, because...magic, I g…

> So we're going to skip becoming carbon neutral and go straight to carbon negative

Yes, when the effects on the environments are so bad that there can be no denying anymore because they affect everyday life of almost all people.

I am not saying this is a good option. I am saying that I don't see an alternative to get a world wide mobilization. Do you see China and the US becoming carbon neutral in the next 10 year?

The annoying "magic" dig was unnecessary. With (clean) energy abundance you can indeed capture enough CO2 to make a world wide impact.

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#159

Post by mnewme »

qsera wrote: post #100
mnewme wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sad to see how many climate sceptics are even on HN

Yea, it is as if some people can still think on their own...

Thinking for yourself doesn’t mean rejecting science and 50 years of research in an area where there’s a rare 99% consensus among scientists (check: Lynas et al., Environmental Research Letters), just because some guys on social media said so.

Re: The Gargantuan Lie That Is Collapsing the Climate

#160

Post by timacles »

nradov wrote: post #84
Ekaros wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is fundamentally the problem with whole thing. Vast majority of population on Earth is not ready for personal sacrifices needed. And if some government will get to around it, I am pretty sure they will be replaced and most things are rolled back. My guess is that we somehow end up geoengineering it with even more debt...

The solution will have to come from growth and technical innovations, not personal sacrifice.

The only solution that will come is from large swaths of the words population to be rapidly reduced, from a garden variety of natural disasters
Post reply on HN