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

Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

greenpeace.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 191 posts

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#141

Post by stubish »

oh_sigh wrote: post #30
toomuchtodo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a house was on fire, what would you consider a win to put it out? Or would you do everything possible to put it out? As the climate continues to rapidly change, the tolerance for extraordinary measures would rise I would imagine (especially amongst youth cohorts who will inherit the cleanup over the next ~100 years). Shareholder value had a cost (industrialization in general [1]), and now it must be paid back. [1]…

Will climate change negatively affect Norway? Clearly there are big time losers with climate change, but is Norway's house really on fire? Or is it a house on the other side of town that is on fire and has little chance of impacting Norway's house?

Yes, climate change will negatively affect all countries. It might be possible for some countries to 'luck out' and gain productive land and improve agricultural yield. But all countries will suffer the global economic, humanitarian and military crisis.

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#142

Post by stubish »

burkaman wrote: post #140
stubish wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greenwashed a lot better? A lot better than whom? Which countries are more deserving of Norway's perceived status as one of the greenest nations?

Really depends on what you mean by green, but here's one methodology: https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2022/component/epi

So 20th, not bad but not the best. Some surprising countries before it, such as Australia. And UK number 2. This does seem to back up the OP.

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#143

Post by brutusborn »

stubish wrote: post #138
brutusborn wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carbon capture is being successfully used all around the world. It’s in its infancy, but so were solar panels decades ago, and we didn’t give up on them. We don’t have enough data on geoengineering to judge yet, there is no real science to follow. Also I don’t understand this attitude of rejecting potential solutions outright. Science doesn’t “prove” things, we can’t ‘follow’ it due to the problem of induction. So we…

The closest we have are emissions reductions on power generation and other highly polluting facilities. Carbon capture of CO2 from the atmosphere is not being used successfully, anywhere. There are plenty of feel good articles about trials and test sites and experimental facilities, none of which are within multiple orders of magnitude of being capable of scaled out to the amounts needed. They all require such vast a…

Saying CCS isn’t currently successful is like saying utility grade solar wasn’t successful in the 70s. We’re on the start of an exponential curve and the tech will only get better.

I don’t understand why people think this is “used” to sell carbon neutral plans: why wouldn’t you count carbon sequestered using CCS? It’s no different to assuming batteries will get a lot cheaper: it’s not a certainty but it’s heading in the right direction.

Let’s put it this way: if we could use CCS to produce carbon neutral power from natural gas, would you reflexively oppose it? Or would you be thankful that we now have another carbon neutral power source?

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#144

Post by dghlsakjg »

brutusborn wrote: post #132
bertil wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Carbon capture is being successfully used all around the world. [Citation needed]

If I must spoon feed you… https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_carbon_capture_and_s...

You must.

That list is a bunch of pilot projects and commitments AFAICT. One of the projects is burning methane from oil production to produce hydrogen to recapture carbon. That’s not really gonna save the world.

I couldn’t find much evidence in there that carbon capture is being done at scale or in a way that isn’t using energy in ways that it would be more efficient to just not do it, since it is pulling from a grid that is partially carbon powered.

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#145

Post by ipaddr »

was_a_dev wrote: post #104
ipaddr wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's called gatekeeping. Wonderful opinions can come for anyone. A scientist is someone who found someone to pay them. Nothing more, nothing less. Ignoring ideas unless they came from a brand is the opposite of science. Then you drop your brand (physicist) and expect others to judge your opinion as more important. It didn't work. As a senior physicist in quantum sensing I'm invalidating your brand.

Wonderful opinions can come from anyone. Are these scientifically founded opinions. Not necessarily, hence why "following the science" is valid if you are following experts in their field. If you're a software consultant, would you take on the opinions from a marketing client on the best algorithm to implement for their solution? Probably not. If someone put in the effort and time to throughly research the topic and…

You would be silly not to take a better algorithm. It doesn't matter if it came from sales, a student or a homemaker.

If you can't judge something on it's merits and must rely on other signals then you end up judging the envelope and not the message.

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#146

Post by brutusborn »

graemep wrote: post #136
brutusborn wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely a physicist is best placed to ‘Nullius in Verba’ and to do his own research. Climate models are fundamentally physical simulations after all…

Biological systems play a huge role in the climate too so its not purely physical simulation.

This is true, but there are no biological simulations in the mainstream models, just various correction factors with their own uncertainty. I wish they had biological data because then we would have more domains in which to measure their accuracy.

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#147

Post by stubish »

brutusborn wrote: post #143
stubish wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The closest we have are emissions reductions on power generation and other highly polluting facilities. Carbon capture of CO2 from the atmosphere is not being used successfully, anywhere. There are plenty of feel good articles about trials and test sites and experimental facilities, none of which are within multiple orders of magnitude of being capable of scaled out to the amounts needed. They all require such vast a…

Saying CCS isn’t currently successful is like saying utility grade solar wasn’t successful in the 70s. We’re on the start of an exponential curve and the tech will only get better. I don’t understand why people think this is “used” to sell carbon neutral plans: why wouldn’t you count carbon sequestered using CCS? It’s no different to assuming batteries will get a lot cheaper: it’s not a certainty but it’s heading in…

I separate emissions reductions tech, such as fitted to power stations, from atmospheric carbon capture. Filtering emissions at source makes sense, and is nothing new. Lets do more of that and better, and I will have no problem with carbon neutral natural gas power if someone can get that to work. Trying to suck carbon out of the atmosphere though is a fools errand, and I do reflexively oppose that, because it has always been lies and propaganda. Large chunks of climate policy assume magic will happen, because technology will save us. But math and physics disagree.

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#148

Post by brutusborn »

stubish wrote: post #147
brutusborn wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying CCS isn’t currently successful is like saying utility grade solar wasn’t successful in the 70s. We’re on the start of an exponential curve and the tech will only get better. I don’t understand why people think this is “used” to sell carbon neutral plans: why wouldn’t you count carbon sequestered using CCS? It’s no different to assuming batteries will get a lot cheaper: it’s not a certainty but it’s heading in…

I separate emissions reductions tech, such as fitted to power stations, from atmospheric carbon capture. Filtering emissions at source makes sense, and is nothing new. Lets do more of that and better, and I will have no problem with carbon neutral natural gas power if someone can get that to work. Trying to suck carbon out of the atmosphere though is a fools errand, and I do reflexively oppose that, because it has al…

What’s the maths and physics that make it impossible? I’m not saying you’re wrong, but I’m interested in the limits.

I still think reflexively opposing a potential solution is stupid. Skepticism is healthy, automatic rejection is a waste. I wholeheartedly agree politicians spout a lot of nonsense, and that the solutions are closer than we think, we just need to get the bad policy out of the way.

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#149

Post by brutusborn »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #144
brutusborn wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I must spoon feed you… https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_carbon_capture_and_s...

You must. That list is a bunch of pilot projects and commitments AFAICT. One of the projects is burning methane from oil production to produce hydrogen to recapture carbon. That’s not really gonna save the world. I couldn’t find much evidence in there that carbon capture is being done at scale or in a way that isn’t using energy in ways that it would be more efficient to just not do it, since it is pulling from a gri…

So your criteria for success is to ‘save the world.’

How about we aim for ‘reduce emissions’ or ‘develop solutions’? Or even better ‘stop opposing people who are trying to help’?

All tech starts at small scales. Yours is an absurd rebuttal.

Re: Norwegian youth win climate court case against the Norwegian State

#150

Post by Invictus0 »

defrost wrote: post #137
tordrt wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it more immoral to export oil and gas than to actually burn it? Norway is hydro power and a lot of EVs.

The age old question of the ethical heroin dealer. Does not selling to the local school while riding an electric scooter make it alright?

Comparing oil to heroin is beyond stupid. It's an essential good responsible for 30% of the world's energy needs. If oil disappeared from the earth tomorrow, entire nations would grind to a halt and millions would die.
Post reply on HN