111–120 of 522 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but it wasn't as hot... It's a vicious self-fueling cycle. By using AC, we're making the world warmer, which makes us use more AC.
People in our Florida office have fan heaters running under the desk because the AC keeps it too cold. The insanity boggles my mind. I had to go out and buy a sweater and thick trousers to sit in the office while it is 32C/90F outside.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the chart. To me it still seems like we are missing something. If you look at the period of 1940 - 1980, then there was not really an upward or downward trend. But in the 36 years after 1980, the global temperature has been going up like crazy. Should all of that be attributed to statistical noise? To me it looks like some new factor has started to influence the climate in the recent years, whatever that f…
Rather than eyeballing it, why not do a proper regression? To me, it looks like a line going up from 1900 with a bump in 1940. But you don't have to take my word for it, there's piles and piles of data out there.
These maps are based on emission trends continuing, assuming no political action will be taken. But wouldn't a hotter world tend to exacerbate emission trends, with human needs for AC and desalination rising, plus forest fires? Moreover, there might be some tipping point for large scale methane release. The 'tail risk' to global warming has appreciable density a long way out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before AC, did people not live without it?
In my part of the world (northern Europe) basically nobody has AC, but that is probably because of the cooler temperatures here. I'm curious, at what temperatures do people who live with AC start using it? Or is it going all year round?
That's the reason some houses have not AC in the south of Europe but all the offices have.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is another solution: less people.
What are you trying to say?
I'm not suggesting how this is done, but we probably shouldn't e.g. subsidize growth anymore. You shouldn't get a tax break for having kids. It should go the other way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even more troubling: we are being punished by what the world did , generations past. This stuff has, by our standards, long delayed effects. The implication is disconcerting: a FULL STOP of excessive green house gas emissions right now will have, at best, a notable impact in several decades.
Without all the stuff generations past did you might still be living in a cave and hunting and gathering for food. All in, the gains you've received from your ancestors FAR FAR outweigh the losses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even with your slightly lower footprint due to not owning a car you still have a much larger footprint than the world mean. Probably 2-3x. So there are billions of people being "punished" for what you're doing.
Well, considering that I get my power from a combination of Nuclear and wind power, I doubt that I give a particularly high carbon footprint. But you're not wrong, I almost certainly have a higher footprint than most of the third world. I guess what I was getting at is that I think the levels New York has are substantially more sustainable than the rest of the US. Sorry for the confusion.
I didn't know if it was just because I now have a 2 year old, but New York summers have definitely seemed harder to deal with each year I've lived here. Is there a commonly accepted minimum temperature difference threshold that is perceivable by humans? E.g., if summer in 2016 was hotter than 2015 by X, I will notice?
Anyone else who feel that the climate-related news are getting very scary? If for every month for the last year, there was a new sprinter breaking the last months world Record in 100 meters you'd know something was fishy. Like some kind of incredibly potent anabolic steroid runners were ingesting. With new and improved versions of that steroid being released every few months...