Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says • Hacker News Board

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#91

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:14 PM UTC

epistasis wrote: post #27

ThrowawayIP wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The technology-will-save-us mentality is part of the reason we are here. We live in a society that doesn't do anything unless it makes money for some set of decrepit old men. We had the means to avoid this (strict vegan diets, ground based mass transit, dense development & re-wilding, energy transition) but people made money doing the opposite. And more people made money sabotaging solar+battery pricing in the US. So…

No it isn't, the idea that strict vegan diets would have stoped climate change is just nonsense. Run the numbers. "Strict vegan diets" is the attitude of US activists telling the developing world that they need to change their behavior before the US activist is willing to accept driving less or adopting dense urban infill housing. "Making money" is the incentive system of society. Technology has now aligned society's…

> People who refused to acknowledge the reality of human society, refused to acknowledge that the profit system exists whether they want it to or not, are responsible for focusing action on ineffective means of change.

Thank you for writing that, because I think it is the key point. It's very easy to blame "decrepit old men" because that makes it someone else's fault - and I get it, as I think that there are a bunch of decrepit old men that deserve a lot of blame.

But democratic societies (and even authoritarian ones that are still somewhat subject to mass unrest) were never going to accept large negative impacts for a consequence that was not immediate and in your face. Like you put it, just go around and ask your average Joe or Jane if they would vote for any candidate who demanded strict vegan diets (or heck, even a lot of the other things on GP's list). You're fooling yourself if you think it's only decrepit old men who don't want that stuff.

And regarding GP's comment that "And more people made money sabotaging solar+battery pricing in the US." Yes, there are some people trying to sabotage this to make money for themselves, but it will not take them too long to fail miserably precisely because the economics are not in their favor. Just look at Texas - not exactly a place known for its love of vegan diets, among other things - and solar, wind and now batteries are now a huge portion of the energy mix and growing fast precisely because it's economical.

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#92

Post by collingreen » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:14 PM UTC

WarmWash wrote: post #23

zhann_dc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, truth be told.. It _is_ nothing compared to Big Oil.

Spoiler: It's individuals who are driving that demand. The impact of the decisions of big oil are nothing compared to the collective decisions of individuals. Big oil isn't going to kick down your door when you buy an EV and switch to solar. There is no rancher in the grocery aisle slipping steaks in your cart.

Spoiler, the oil and other energy industries have done a world changing amount of lobbying and regulatory capture in order to drive decisions that cause more and more fossil fuel use. This includes everything from subsidies to industry stagnating regulations to reduced enforcement to suburban sprawl. Look at how the current US administration shills for big coal. Pretending they haven't shaped the world around the consumers is either naive or bad faith.

Yes, consumers have to stop funding these companies and behaviors. Also, the governments that operate on behalf of those consumers have to drop their corruption and start protecting those people they represent. Both virtuous and nonvirtuous conservatives know neither of these are going to happen, which is why they see massive terraforming technology as the only way out - if someone with power can't get rich(er) fixing it then it won't get fixed.

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#93

Post by dfdydx » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:15 PM UTC

p-e-w wrote: post #68

mrob wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an obvious path that the environmentalists mostly opposed. A decade is plenty of time for massive scale buildout of nuclear power. If we'd started that a decade ago we'd be in a good position now.

Indeed. At this point I’d say that the “green movement” has done more damage to the planet than the fossil fuel industry. The entire Western world (with the exception of France) pretty much stopped building nuclear power plants 40 years ago, because of a single accident that by its most pessimistic estimates killed fewer people in total than coal emissions kill every 3 days. It’s madness.

What was the fossil fuel industry plan to massively shrink the fossil fuel industry exactly?

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#94

Post by dfdydx » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:15 PM UTC

sajithdilshan wrote: post #71

shubhamjain wrote: post #55

It’s surreal how quickly this went from being the most important problem in the world to barely being on anyone’s mind, all in less than a decade. I had plenty of problems with the fear-mongering and doomed-by-2030 predictions, but the current situation, where we seem basically fine with doing nothing, is genuinely scary. Technology has its limits, billions of people still aspire to a European standard of living, and…

Because it’s truly a first world problem. Rest of the world has other problems like hunger, clean drinking water and other basic necessities to solve

Aren't those "other problems" somewhat affected by climate change though?

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#95

Post by b40d-48b2-979e » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:16 PM UTC

Smoofer wrote: post #36

jezzamon wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People need cars... But not trucks for work :)

Uhh a lot of people need trucks for their work

Yeah? We need millions of personal, individual trucks? For work, of course, ignore all those white collar job parking lots full of extended cab pickups that get 10mpg.

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#96

Post by psadri » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:16 PM UTC

multiplegeorges wrote: post #2

Not much of a surprise. Government action has been anemic at best. Industry action (overall) has been net negative. The only hope now is exponential growth of (solar and wind)+batteries making other sources uneconomic. This seems to be slowly happening, so I hope we hit the exponential curve soon and we're there quicker than we expect. This only stops it. Then, to fix it, we'll need a massive Direct Air Capture indus…

I have been wondering: more solar means we are making Earth less reflective. Solar energy that might have been reflected back to space is now absorbed by the PV to make electricity. But that delta has to go somewhere? Where does it go in terms of Earth’s temperature. Same with more nuclear… we’d be pumping more energy into the system.

Don’t take this as an argument against these technologies. It’s a huge win to not be increasing the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#97

Post by mik1998 » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:17 PM UTC

lensecat wrote: post #43

throw8393739 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sorry but this just isn't true. Of course you need more energy to produce a cow and then eat it than you need to sustain yourself by just eating the cows food.

Let's cut out the middleman of grass here and just directly eat dirt and sunlight.

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#98

Post by jpalawaga » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:17 PM UTC

lensecat wrote: post #43

throw8393739 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Sorry but this just isn't true. Of course you need more energy to produce a cow and then eat it than you need to sustain yourself by just eating the cows food.

I think it really depends by what you mean when you say vegan.

If you’re eating vegan cheeses and whatnot you’re probably not doing so hot. Or impossible burgers. Or any other manner of “invented” food that is not essentially basic agrarian or hunter-gatherer.

Conversely, wildlife play important ecological purposes and can be hunted sustainably.

Wild life can also be useful in processing things we cannot eat and grows in abundance (grass) into things we can eat (cows).

Everything in moderation…

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#99

Post by sajithdilshan » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:17 PM UTC

dfdydx wrote: post #94

sajithdilshan wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it’s truly a first world problem. Rest of the world has other problems like hunger, clean drinking water and other basic necessities to solve

Aren't those "other problems" somewhat affected by climate change though?

All those problems were already there even before climate change was a topic, so nothing new regarding that front

Re: Global warming will exceed 1.5-degree limit, UN says

#100

Post by pingou » Sat, Sep 05, 2026, 3:17 PM UTC

charles_f wrote: post #59

epistasis wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it isn't, the idea that strict vegan diets would have stoped climate change is just nonsense. Run the numbers. "Strict vegan diets" is the attitude of US activists telling the developing world that they need to change their behavior before the US activist is willing to accept driving less or adopting dense urban infill housing. "Making money" is the incentive system of society. Technology has now aligned society's…

You're assuming that we keep the same system and that no sacrificing can be made. Technology is seen as the only solution because of the primary assumption that we need to keep growth and late stage capitalism. Degrowth, relocalisation, lower consumption are all solutions that would work better than technology (there are very serious people out there who demonstrated that technology won't replace the energy we need,…

Jancovici said a lot of stupid things also, although it seems that he recently acknowledged that renewables could make an impact (and not just "l'épaisseur du trait" as he always said). I'm not sure what you mean by "degrowth, relocalisation, lower consumption are all solutions that would work better than technology". People in general do no want to consume less, or buy more expensive stuff created locally, so I think it's easier to create new technologies than to change people mindset, although we probably should try to do both (which we are).