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

Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#151

Post by hutzlibu »

matco11 wrote: post #16

> This pact aims to keep the rise in global temperatures well below 2C this century and to pursue efforts to keep it under 1.5C. It seems to me that continuing to communicate just the average temperature increase is a missed opportunity to engage with a greater portion of the population. 1.5 or 2 degrees do not seem like much, but once one understands that’s an average made out of much bigger positive and negative sw…

I think Randall puts it into perspective very well:

https://xkcd.com/1732/

(but still not targeting laypersons)

Scientific facts alone are not helping most people.

Recently there was torrential rain in parts of germany. And people were warned (per official SMS) with: Expect x liters of rain per hour.

Most understood, ok, so there is heavy rain. I keep my umbrella close by.

What they did not understand is, that this meant a massive flood, with houses close to small rivers vanished and over 160 people died.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#152

Post by thewhitetulip »

dredmorbius wrote: post #134
thewhitetulip wrote: post #82

Climate change is bad. Govt are not doing anything. But has any model taken into consideration about covid deaths?

Covid-19 deaths have been all but invisible in the larger scheme, at least to date. Far more signficant has been the global economic shutdown imposed by quarantine and containment efforts. That's somewhat reduced fossil fuel usage, though that effect has also been limited. It was enough to show up in BP's annual review of global energy usage though, released about a month ago in July: https://www.bp.com/en/global/cor…

Since lockdowns have been lifted I don't thin this will be relevant anymore.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#153

Post by baxtr »

The world's population was at around 5.3 bn in 1990 and is now approaching 7.7 bn. This ain't a popular opinion on HN, but I think a key factor to getting climate change under control (whatever that means), is to reduce the growth and to stabilize the population.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#154

Post by Aerroon »

malwarebytess wrote: post #116

At some point we need to consider ramping down mass production no matter the consequences. This is getting out of hand.

And do what? Cause even more human suffering by preventing others from reaching a better standard of living?

What do we ramp down? Electronics? Clothes? Food? Transport?

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#155

Post by teniutza »

Xplune13 wrote: post #54
matco11 wrote: post #16

> This pact aims to keep the rise in global temperatures well below 2C this century and to pursue efforts to keep it under 1.5C. It seems to me that continuing to communicate just the average temperature increase is a missed opportunity to engage with a greater portion of the population. 1.5 or 2 degrees do not seem like much, but once one understands that’s an average made out of much bigger positive and negative sw…

Yes and I don't think people are going to wake up till everyone faces the consequences of climate change in their personal lives, which is quite honestly just sad.

I don't think this is going to be enough. We see everyday people affected by the pandemic yet many of them still refuse to get vaccinated, keep distance or even wear a mask... They will just dismiss these consequences as "one offs"...

I believe that our best chance is to do as much as we cand right now and to induce a sense of climate awareness into the younger generations. Bring them up believing, well, actually knowing, that the climate must be respected and protected constantly.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#156

Post by drclau »

Xplune13 wrote: post #54
matco11 wrote: post #16

> This pact aims to keep the rise in global temperatures well below 2C this century and to pursue efforts to keep it under 1.5C. It seems to me that continuing to communicate just the average temperature increase is a missed opportunity to engage with a greater portion of the population. 1.5 or 2 degrees do not seem like much, but once one understands that’s an average made out of much bigger positive and negative sw…

Yes and I don't think people are going to wake up till everyone faces the consequences of climate change in their personal lives, which is quite honestly just sad.

There were people infected with Covid, in hospital, which still denied that Covid is real. Granted, those extremes are rare, but it shows how resilient in their beliefs deniers are. I think you are quite optimistic in thinking people will wake up.

Nevertheless, we don’t need everyone to accept the reality, for us to be able to take action as a civilization.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#157

Post by konspence »

ttiurani wrote: post #131
konspence wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing to "keep" under 1.5C, we are pretty much already there when error bars are considered. 2C is going to be breached regardless because even if we went carbon neutral today we have decades of locked in warming. Why the scientists are not communicating this information which has been in pop-science (as early as An Inconvenient Truth (2006), which documents the lag between CO2 rise and temp rise) is beyond…

Don't quite know what you mean by "locked in warming" (nor didn't have time to look at this report yet), but the previous scenarios have massive scale future magic carbon takeback tech baked in. I assume if there was something like that ongoing on a global scale and almost no new emissions, 1.5 degrees might be theoretically possible?

Thanks, good call out. This was largely based on some charts from An Inconvenient Truth which showed temp as a latent responding variable to CO2 PPM.

Obviously a lot of research has happened since then, so I looked it up, and the lag period between CO2 and temperature rise is much shorter than I expected. It seems it is just a decade - so if we went to carbon negative today, we could see results in under 10 years [1] [2].

Kind of unclear if the baseline carbon we could achieve will result in YoY decrease in temperature, given the feedback loops and it already raising temperatures every year.

If the research you mentioned is predicated on massive carbon takeback then I am highly suspicious. The public sector doesn't have the will, and the private sector doesn't have the incentive.

[1]: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/10/3/03...

[2]: https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/16/is-it-too-late-to-prevent-cl...

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#158

Post by matzab »

perryizgr8 wrote: post #145

> "We will see even more intense and more frequent heatwaves," said Dr Friederike Otto, from the University of Oxford, UK, and one of the IPCC report's authors. > "And we will also see an increase in heavy rainfall events on a global scale, and also increases in some types of droughts in some regions of the world." According to TFA these are the consequences to expect if 1.5 degrees rise occurs. Doesn't sound like "c…

According to TFA (a few paragraphs above your quotes, even) we won't stay at 1.5 degrees.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#159

Post by flr03 »

Joeri wrote: post #70
skinkestek wrote: post #31

So now we can get rid of fast fashion, mandate reusability for products, reintroduce basic woodworking, metalcrafting and sewing/repair work in school and with that get rid of a huge chunk of the needless shipping? Or are we still going to go after individuals eating traditional food while thought leaders fly across the globe in private jets (no kidding) telling us we need to change our diet? PS: I'm already a enthus…

Individual action won’t solve this problem. We need to leave the fossil fuels in the ground, which means switching energy sources, which is not something individuals have much influence on. Reducing energy use at the individual level is good, but insufficient if the energy used comes from fossil fuels. I’m not sure we need to switch lifestyles that much, but we will need to radically change energy production. There h…

Individuals vote and buy. Companies keep doing what they do because: 1. The law allows it 2. There is a demand for their products

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#160

Post by Aerroon »

poorjohnmacafee wrote: post #47

> But there is new hope that deep cuts in emissions of greenhouse gases could stabilise rising temperatures. How is this possible when you have water vapor in a positive feedback loop, which is a far more potent, prevalent ghg that increases with any rise in temperature. "Water vapor reduction" has to be part of the message at this stage, not just carbon reduction.

Water vapor also means more clouds which reflect sunlight. Are you sure that it's a positive feedback loop?

Edit: this is a genuine question. The last time I read about it the result was inconclusive whether it caused or hindered warming.

Post reply on HN