It’s essential to consider the multifaceted effects of our environmental interventions. For instance, the commendable move in 2020 to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions in shipping lanes had an unintended side effect. The decreased emissions meant fewer sulfur dioxide-based clouds in the atmosphere, which previously reflected a significant amount of sunlight and contributed to rain cloud formation. While reducing emissions is a positive change, the absence of these ‘reflective clouds’ might be inadvertently amplifying the heat, especially when combined with the current El Niño. This could partially explain the accelerated ice melt in Antarctica we’re observing just three years after the regulation change. It serves as a reminder that the Earth’s climate system is intricately interconnected, and actions in one area can have cascading effects.
Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
101–110 of 116 posts
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#102Vote out any policy maker who impedes the response to climate change. This is not something we fix as individuals, with feel-good home solutions, recycling, or planting trees. Large industry is destroying our world, on purpose, because of greed. This only gets fixed through policy and regulation. Vote.
You are implying there are candidates who do not impede response to climate change: even the Greens are against nuclear, which in my understanding, is totally unproductive. They are also still debating "décroissance", that is "de-growth". I find crazy that no one even mentionned the word "efficiency" as in "we might not need all the resources we consume to produce everything we do today. Let's set a realistic efficie…
Great point. Finding consensus on a solution is problematic.
I was referring to people who deny that climate change is even real. I would love to get to the stage of debating how to fix things, instead of being stuck in the stage of complete denial.
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#103Vote out any policy maker who impedes the response to climate change. This is not something we fix as individuals, with feel-good home solutions, recycling, or planting trees. Large industry is destroying our world, on purpose, because of greed. This only gets fixed through policy and regulation. Vote.
Policy won't change unless the two party gridlock does. Even when the Dems take power (like now), nothing really happens. It's just lip service at best.
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#104Vote out any policy maker who impedes the response to climate change. This is not something we fix as individuals, with feel-good home solutions, recycling, or planting trees. Large industry is destroying our world, on purpose, because of greed. This only gets fixed through policy and regulation. Vote.
How do I vote out Chinese and Indian policy makers where bulk of coal power plants are continuing to be built?
Understand the context first instead of believing the simplistic memes pushed by climate change denialists. For example, in India the reason is that there was a shortage of natural gas which became scarce and super expensive because of world events, so they had to build more coal power plants to not have blackouts. Solar is still growing fast, 82% of new capacity in 2022 was solar, and there's a lot more in the pipeline.
https://cleantechnica.com/2023/06/29/solar-82-of-power-capac...
37% of new car sales in China are either full electric or plugin hybrid. 25% are full electric BEVs. The west is far behind.
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine regulatory asphyxiation disappears. Imagine energy tech gets its own Moore's law. Imagine cheap abundant energy, say 10 orders of magnitude from now in a few decades. Heating up or cooling down the planet at will doesn't sound impossible then.
So we should just hope this all away? That's a deeply childish viewpoint, and hoping is not a reliable plan. It will require many things: Carbon regulation plus geo-engineering plus improved power systems plus personal sacrifice. But where that starts is legislation. This is how we solved acid raid, the ozone layer, lead-based fuels and paints, and oh so many other environmental externalities. Individuals cannot solv…
> So we should just hope this all away?
No, absolutely not!
> But where that starts is legislation.
No, absolutely not! Where it starts is invention and invention is currently severely hindered by regulation, alarmism and skewed incentives. Why would a bright mind work on nuclear physics if you can make more money as a lawyer?
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#106Vote out any policy maker who impedes the response to climate change. This is not something we fix as individuals, with feel-good home solutions, recycling, or planting trees. Large industry is destroying our world, on purpose, because of greed. This only gets fixed through policy and regulation. Vote.
You are implying there are candidates who do not impede response to climate change: even the Greens are against nuclear, which in my understanding, is totally unproductive. They are also still debating "décroissance", that is "de-growth". I find crazy that no one even mentionned the word "efficiency" as in "we might not need all the resources we consume to produce everything we do today. Let's set a realistic efficie…
all politicians are flawed. vote for the least flawed.
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was record high the whole year. http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2023/09/asina_S_iqr_...
In that case the line would've been constantly on top in the article, like the current year is below it, but it isn't. While high it intermingles with the other lines, and is nowhere as much an outlier. Also 2014 seems to've been more ice due to record snowfall, which is easier to freeze than the regular freezing of the sea. Seems to be in line with climate models predicting more erratic weather. Good example of why…
The article wants to convince you in something and naturally the visuals are adjusted to help that goal. Have a look at the raw data if you like.
So far, as much as I can see, the current climate models do not predict absolutely anything in advance, but are used to explain things afterwards to show that anything is caused by co2.
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Could you elaborate on your world view or are you just trolling? Progress and capitalism optimize for value or $, and have no attention for the environmental cost as long as those are not put into regulations. You don't agree with that?
See the thread below: https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=unpopular42#37543571
And just to be clear, climate regulations are not the same as pollution laws
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#109Vote out any policy maker who impedes the response to climate change. This is not something we fix as individuals, with feel-good home solutions, recycling, or planting trees. Large industry is destroying our world, on purpose, because of greed. This only gets fixed through policy and regulation. Vote.
How do I vote out Chinese and Indian policy makers where bulk of coal power plants are continuing to be built?
India is emitting massively under their fair share of the world's CO2 emissions under any sane allocation. So the first thing to do is not vote for policy makers who try to deflect from their country emitting way more than its fair share by bringing up India.
Re: Antarctic sea-ice at 'mind-blowing' low alarms experts
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are implying there are candidates who do not impede response to climate change: even the Greens are against nuclear, which in my understanding, is totally unproductive. They are also still debating "décroissance", that is "de-growth". I find crazy that no one even mentionned the word "efficiency" as in "we might not need all the resources we consume to produce everything we do today. Let's set a realistic efficie…
I guess you could see de-growth as efficiency, lower useless production/necessary production for a good life-ratio. If we just reduced the resources needed to produce todays consumption, why wouldn't the savings just go to producing more of the same stuff? Ie. growth?
If we reorganized our way of living to utilize tool libraries, maybe 1 large garage per x blocks, in it have power tools, cleaning supplies, outdoor tools, recreational vehicles etc.. if you don't use it 3 or more times per week do you really need to own it outright?
I think also using tiny homes and more insulated and cheaper earth bag homes could help but also would help with the housing crisis. There's a lot we could share, and if we did maybe we could also build smaller homes and lots as we wouldn't need as much storage.