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

Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 236 posts

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#191

Post by Timon3 »

SoftTalker wrote: post #157
agentultra wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that much of a difference for the average or lower classes of people that outnumber the rich by quite a lot. It would have a great and positive impact for them.

No, the rich will be able to pay the carbon taxes easily, the average folks will suffer under them.

Carbon taxes can be implemented such that average folks benefit from them, e.g. by paying everyone back the average tax amount. Wealth generally correlates with carbon emissions, so wealthy people would pay more than they get back. This would greatly incentivize less emissions-intensive products and services.

Unfortunately there's no way the rich would ever let this go through.

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#192

Post by antibarbarus »

Forget about global trends, forget "unprecedented events", this isn’t rocket science, I’ve seen the climate shift myself, in my lifetime, and I’m not even that old. It’s difficult to imagine how people elsewhere aren’t seeing the same, like we aren’t inhabiting the same reality somehow?

In Continental Europe we used to have winters with regular snow even in large cities. I know, I really liked playing in the snow as a kid. It was cold. For the past dozen or so years, there is less and less snowfall, with milder and milder winters. Snow in the cities amounts to maybe a week or three of weak drizzle. Forget about what my grandpa remembered about how the Danube used to freeze over so you could walk across the river. What we do seem to get more of is wild, torrential rainfall in sudden bursts amid long dry spells. Bad for infrastructure, even worse for agriculture.

The climate is changing here, and it’s getting hotter, not colder or more balanced. Wildfires are increasing in frequency, and God knows what’s going on with the country’s underground aquifers, we never seem to care about those, because we’ve always just had plenty, so why worry. Of course all this is easily dismissed as anecdata. But when I read about the research labelling Europe the fastest warming continent, I don’t have trouble believing it. Sure, someone living in the northernmost reaches of Europe might not see anything, yet, this doesn’t mean the research is wrong.

Worse yet, the infrastructure for dealing with this simply isn’t there in most countries, and I’m not talking about stuff that will "reverse global warming" or whatever, I’m talking steps that will keep cities livable in the short to medium time-span. Most societies are unwilling to mentally deal with or consider what might happen two, three decades down the line. They aren’t willing to contend with a future where their children will have to endure water rationing, curfews, economic and other hardship, mass migration or any number of scenarios that will affect their wellbeing.

We have to greenify the streets, reduce the number of heat-producing vehicles, upgrade the pipelines, irrigation, water collection, and other systems across European cities... I have a sneaking suspicion it will take some massive, un-ignorable crisis, like a record number of elderly people dying from heat exposure to actually start investing in any of this. And by then it might be too late.

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#193

Post by estearum »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #137
estearum wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. We've made significant enough progress on this issue to prove that policy-driven progress is in fact possible. This type of cynicism is both unwarranted and unhelpful.

These changes were often not driven by the "green" parties though.

This is far too complex a conversation to have at the level of abstraction you're trying to have it.

Just say what you're trying to say. I don't know what "green parties" refers to across the entire globe of climate efforts, but quite obviously yes, most of the positive climate policies have been pushed by people who care about the climate.

Just as obvious, most of those policies were not successfully enacted by the fringiest and most extreme versions of pro-climate people.

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#194

Post by estearum »

Noaidi wrote: post #111
estearum wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can vote

Both parties in the United States are pretty much turning a blind eye to climate change. What we need to do is start boycotting parties, telling them we won’t vote for them unless they have really strong climate platforms. We need to make them want our vote.

Imagine thinking that politicians give literally even one single fuck about non-voters' opinions lmao

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#196

Post by sarchertech »

iLemming wrote: post #131
sarchertech wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way I can read what they wrote to mean that is if they are saying water costs $30-40 a gallon.

Have you never used a garden hose? Do you know that a regular, average hose left running overnight can waste like 5,000 gallons of water? My HOA enforces a rule - you must keep at least two trees per household. Trees need water. Not that much, of course, I shared the overnight hose number just for the sense of measure. Now you do the math - couple of trees, bathrooms, showering, drinking, cooking - that water usage a…

I mean sure don’t leave a garden hose running overnight. That’s insane. If you leave it running next your house you’ll flood your basement.

You said you had a pool though. That and trying to keep 2 non native trees alive in the desert is probably equivalent to irrigating a large yard.

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#197

Post by spwa4 »

kakwa_ wrote: post #184
slashdev wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US emissions have declined 18% since 2005. Look at Asia.

Both sides of the equation need to be solved. The US is still one of the leading CO2 emitters, both per capita and in absolute terms. And for cumulative past emissions, it's not even close. The expectation is not a mere 18% decrease but something closer to halving emissions just to be on a per capita level comparable to the EU or China. It doesn't mean China doesn't need to make efforts. China's emissions are yet to…

> Both sides of the equation need to be solved.

Sorry, but, at this point ... why? Oil will run out before 2070 (read a bit of peak oil talk, oil running out doesn't mean zero oil pumped up, it means zero used for transport. There will still be reasons to dig up a little bit of oil). The strongest climate agreement was essentially status-quo in 2050, which now seems unlikely to actually happen, for 2 different reasons.

First, the very very bad news: the most recent climate agreement was less ambitious (because Russia, China, India and essentially all of Africa refused, even more than the US did under Trump). The secretary general of the UN got accused of joining oil trade deal meetings at the climate conference in Azerbaijan. At this point, a political solution is just not going to happen, nobody wants to make it happen. The other side of the equation, oil producers, Russia, Saudi Arabia refused to even discuss any kind of limits AT ALL, an even more extreme position than the US. So there's no political options there either.

What the EU decides to do or not do is a rounding error, every European country except Russia (insofar they're European) just can't do anything, and even the US matters less and less.

But the good news: if you look at production quotas and solar replacement, ie. the economics of oil, oil should run out sooner (because the maximum price anyone will pay will drop, but of course same caveat, run out does not mean 0) than the agreement puts in place.

So why do anything at this point? God, so to speak, will interfere. By that I mean digging up oil will become difficult/expensive while solar and batteries becomes cheaper, which will result in a faster drop in oil use than actually respecting the most recent agreement.

So, no, nothing needs to happen.

And now we are in the situation we are already in for 50+ years: You want to help climate change? Go study chemistry. Find new energy conversions that work. Find new battery chemistry that works better. Find a way to carry electrical energy with 10x the density of the best batteries (so even militaries have zero reason to get away from oil, ie. this is the only way to convince China and India to use less oil). THAT will accelerate oil's decline.

Politically? There is no reason here whatsoever for political change in Europe. And while I want Trump gone, so far he's by far the politician pushing the hardest for solar, despite his rhetoric.

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#198

Post by folkrav »

slashdev wrote: post #126
folkrav wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe this country focusing so much on keeping the gas cheap might have something to do with it.

US emissions have declined 18% since 2005. Look at Asia.

Asia does about 50% the global emissions while having 60% of the world's population. The US alone does about 12% being 5% of global population.

US approaches 15t/CO2 per capita. Every single country in Asia is under 9t, China and India included. This is despite the US having outsourced most of its heavy manufacturing to, of course, Asia.

Blaming Asia alone and refusing any responsibility is a massive cop out.

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#199

Post by tpm »

MrSkelter wrote: post #188
iLemming wrote: post #6

We're getting cooked. I'm already paying 10-times more for water usage than I spend on gas, and 5-times more on electricity bills - AC's running non-stop. That's crazy, because I live in the area where you can't even walk to buy a piece of bread - we drive all the time. I fully expect for businesses very soon to operate at night. Costco, Walmart, groceries, even libraries will be working all night in places like Ariz…

I am currently in London. I have run AC every night since May in order to sleep. The interior of my new build luxury apartment in the financial district is routinely over 30°C during the day and can’t be cooled below that even with the windows covered and the (portable) AC running. At the turn of the century the CIA predicted climate change and water being the primary drivers of conflict in the 20s. We are already se…

> The interior of my new build luxury apartment in the financial district is routinely over 30°C

That's not a well built building though. Our flat in warmer location in Europe does not get over 27C unless it's over 33C outside, and that withou the AC active.

Re: Highest-ever ocean temperature measured as powerful El Niño forms

#200

Post by SoftTalker »

Timon3 wrote: post #191
SoftTalker wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the rich will be able to pay the carbon taxes easily, the average folks will suffer under them.

Carbon taxes can be implemented such that average folks benefit from them, e.g. by paying everyone back the average tax amount. Wealth generally correlates with carbon emissions, so wealthy people would pay more than they get back. This would greatly incentivize less emissions-intensive products and services. Unfortunately there's no way the rich would ever let this go through.

> Wealth generally correlates with carbon emissions

That may be true but there aren't enough wealthy people to just attack their consumption. In aggregate, regular people use a lot more energy. There's no way out of this that is going to be popular.

Post reply on HN