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

The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 176 posts

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#101

Post by vladms »

cautiouscat wrote: post #29

I recognize this is deeply cynical and definitely doomerist. What can I as an individual actually do to stop this? Why should I even bother reading articles like this at this point? I can't do anything. I can't action it. I can collect my recycling, pop solar panels on my roof and be the most carbon footprint conscious person and it wouldn't move the needle an atom's width. Politicians don't care, and the ones that d…

I think "how to stop this" is the wrong objective. It's like "what I can do to achieve world peace tomorrow?". There is no answer to that. Yes, people promise to solve wars "in a day" but that does not work.

Depending on your situations different actions will have a different impact.

I do try to choose what I can to help. I am not obsessed with "the impact". If I buy a train ticket instead of a plane ticket - that can mean trains get more money. If I keep my phone for one more year, less waste is produced.

Would I help with the situation if I would buy a car consuming lots of gas, take international trips every years etc. (I could afford it, that's not the issue) ? I think not.

Can I say that my actions significantly influence the outcome? Definitely not, but we are 8 billions on this planet, so it all depends on averages. But if I don't do it (I am convinced there is an issue), how could I expect others to have my position...

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#103

Post by NamlchakKhandro »

cautiouscat wrote: post #29

I recognize this is deeply cynical and definitely doomerist. What can I as an individual actually do to stop this? Why should I even bother reading articles like this at this point? I can't do anything. I can't action it. I can collect my recycling, pop solar panels on my roof and be the most carbon footprint conscious person and it wouldn't move the needle an atom's width. Politicians don't care, and the ones that d…

Nothing

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#104

Post by vladms »

_petronius wrote: post #52
_petronius wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Political participation -- voting, organising for the groups you support, actively engaging in meetings and public forums, building social groups of like-minded individuals. It is hugely effective. The worst doomerism is the idea that politics is ineffective. It is incredibly effective, and only the people that participate in it have any effect on it. There are more types of politics that national and international.…

Downvote me all you want, naysayers. If politics didn't work, then the people you don't like wouldn't be in power.

I would expect people I don't like in power. They should represent more than just me, and most of the population has quite some different opinions.

I would just hope most people don't like them either and they look for the "next one". Otherwise you transform politicians in a cult...

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#105

Post by HEmanZ »

sparkie wrote: post #80
HEmanZ wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my family, about 5 out of 100 people believe climate change is even real. So ya, I think the average at this point is "I'm ambivalent, climate change may not even be real. But mostly I don't care"

The poorest in society are the lowest CO2 emitters - they don't fly often, many don't own a car and use public transport - they can't afford meat in every meal - can't afford air con in summer or heating in winter. Conversely, the wealthiest are frequent flyers, are chauffeured about in SUVs and rarely walk. They have everything they'll ever need and don't concern themselves about running the AC or heating. They're p…

If you’re talking about a world democracy like the USA, the consumption gap between rich and poor effectively doesn’t matter from a climate change perspective. You could vanish the top 75% of Americans and still we’d have a climate change problem (albeit less of one for sure).

People get confused by some of the research because it often publishes emissions by who owns the asset emitting and not who consumes it (eg Starr et al paper breaks down both, and consumption vs ownership is wildly different, and you can tell what bent people have by which number they pick to report on…)

Another way I’d put it: if you’re not ready for gas to be $40/gallon and beef to be $100/lb ground, then you’re not really ready to fight climate change. And no one is, so it’s not going to happen unless we get a technology miracle.

Lots of things are wealth gap problems. Climate change is not, it’s an everyone problem.

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#106

Post by ath3nd »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #67
teachrdan wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What can I as an individual actually do to stop this? Short of becoming the Luigi of the environmental movement, there is nothing an individual can do. You have to take part in some kind of ongoing collective action. This can include joining a campaign against the oil and gas industry, going door to door for candidates who will reverse climate change, or engaging in direct action against environmentally destructive…

Luigi accomplished nothing but folk hero status, United Healthcare premiums increased by double-digit percentages this year. Change requires a pattern not a moment.

[dead]

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#107

Post by dgellow »

coolThingsFirst wrote: post #19

why is it that for the ozone layer we got together and undid the damage but for climate change we don't? is it too politicized, are the required changes too damaging to the economy to start agressively implementing them?

Was an industry really hurt by the actions needed to rebuild the ozone layer? I don’t think so, at least not as far as I can remember. On the other hand the fossil fuel industry has an insane amount of control over politics since a century or so?

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#108

Post by realo »

_petronius wrote: post #52
_petronius wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Political participation -- voting, organising for the groups you support, actively engaging in meetings and public forums, building social groups of like-minded individuals. It is hugely effective. The worst doomerism is the idea that politics is ineffective. It is incredibly effective, and only the people that participate in it have any effect on it. There are more types of politics that national and international.…

Downvote me all you want, naysayers. If politics didn't work, then the people you don't like wouldn't be in power.

I totally get you and in theory you are right.

And yet, in the USA you have gerrymandering and apparently _wanted_ Trump.

Twice.

Something has to be very wrong somewhere.

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#109

Post by jay_kyburz »

Marsymars wrote: post #72
unsupp0rted wrote: post #31

I’m not sure: when I was in high school / university it was well understood that places like Florida would be under water and unlivable by now. Already then you could find this exact article title in a dozen publications per year, especially in academic publications. Al Gore made a third career out of it. It was alarmist and too soon then but it’s not alarmist and too soon now? Nobody upvotes an article titled “Thing…

> I’m not sure: when I was in high school / university it was well understood that places like Florida would be under water and unlivable by now. This doesn't seem plausible - the worst-case predictions for sea level rise by the end of the century are around 2m. That would certainly be bad for Florida, but like 80% of the population lives higher than 2m above sea level, so it certainly wouldn't be unliveable .

A beautiful island archipelago with heaps of cool snorkeling in the ruins just below the surface.

Re: The world may have less time than it thinks on climate change

#110

Post by jay_kyburz »

gwbas1c wrote: post #83
ifdefdebug wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually people trying to be helpful just post an archive link, instead of requesting others to do so...

I had a lot of trouble finding one

I tried to create one for archive.is but it failed.
Post reply on HN