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

Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 249 posts

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#161

Post by _jyog »

trophycase wrote: post #106
bin0 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way this is happening is if the planet gets depopulated of humans rapidly. Please don't tell me you're one of those "earth would be better of were we all dead" people. I can't stand that kind of post-modernist, nihilistic garbage. I'm not mister optimist, but still, that's way too far. Also, that kind of rhetoric is going to end up being a justification for some one very evil doing some thing very bad. > T…

You use "post-modernism" like Jordan Peterson uses "post-modernism"... incorrectly, and likely without having read any of it. If anything, reducing population (not through genocide obviously) for expedience is actually a very neoliberal idea

> You use "post-modernism" like Jordan Peterson uses "post-modernism"... incorrectly, and likely without having read any of it.

Incorrect on both counts. And I use it to describe the philosophical base that essentially, there is no absolute truth and nothing can be taken for reality. Which, ironically, post-modernists use their only absolute truth.

> reducing population (not through genocide obviously) for expedience is actually a very neoliberal idea

What makes you think I'm a neoliberal? And what does that have to do with what I said? More importantly, how would you reduce it? It took hundreds of years for the West to reduce birth rates. Cultural factors often mean people have many children, even if they have access to birth control. See the attempts to do this in Africa. There has been some success, but not a ton.

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#162

Post by martincollignon »

Interesting to see more and more climate related posts on HN. Posted this a couple of times already, but I'd encourage everyone to check this paper[0] that recently came out ("Tackling Climate Change with Machine Learning").

Among one of the initiatives mentioned is a startup called Tomorrow [1] that integrates with services (Uber, Instacart, etc) to calculate your personal CO2 emissions. They need help to get more of these integrations and more CO2 models. Consider giving a hand to them or other projects like this one [2].

[0] https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.05433

[1] https://www.tmrow.com/

[2] https://openclimatefix.github.io/

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#163

Post by valw »

bin0 wrote: post #158
valw wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've seen numerous promising business ideas to capture carbon and convert it into useful materials; I think it's more feasible to do that than to force veganism on every one. Yeah, we've all seen them - they make for fantastic headlines. None of them is as viable as protecting forests / planting trees by a long shot. They systematically fail to mention that the energy consumption is super high or that they're not s…

> privileged people I don't eat a ton of beef, but no, beef is relatively affordable (at least in America). But I do eat a lot more chicken, and not a ton of beef. With that said, I want a good steak once every few months and a burger once a week. More importantly, I don't want the government saying "thou shalt" about my beef consumption, nor do I want people finger-wagging at me about it. America can sustainably rai…

> With that said, I don't emit that much (all things considered)

Cool, how much? IIRC, sustainability would require an individual average below 2 teqCO2/year.

> Besides, would money not be better spent curing cancer?

Look at what the world would look like if climate change is not prevented: https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/what-the-world-will-look-l.... Think of the consequences in famines (whole countries transformed into deserts), flooding, and the mass migrations and wars that would ensue. So no, cancer is not the priority, not when people will die by the hundreds of millions before reaching the age for getting cancer.

> I'm not sure that I believe the "impending doom" stuff about global warming.

Then you are in denial, and need to be exposed to more science. Again, sorry for being blunt.

> Humans are the most remarkably adaptable species on the planet; we will adapt to a hotter earth if need be.

Yeah sure, we can't individually give up on our beef sandwich, but we will have no problem adapting collectively to most of our current living spaces becoming uninhabitable.

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#164

Post by richev »

noonespecial wrote: post #138
bin0 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way this is happening is if the planet gets depopulated of humans rapidly. Please don't tell me you're one of those "earth would be better of were we all dead" people. I can't stand that kind of post-modernist, nihilistic garbage. I'm not mister optimist, but still, that's way too far. Also, that kind of rhetoric is going to end up being a justification for some one very evil doing some thing very bad. > T…

"earth would be better off were we all dead" The right answer to this is "for who?" and "why would it matter then?" We don't save the earth for the earth. We save it for ourselves.

> We don't save the earth for the earth. We save it for ourselves.

I was hoping that we were trying to save it (from us!) because this is simply the right thing to do.

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#165

Post by perfunctory »

tyfon wrote: post #131
navigatesol wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've done radical changes to my life at least last few years to reduce my pollution/co2 footprint and if more people think like this it _will_ help. Ah yes, the 1%, living in their mansions and driving Teslas to their summer homes, telling the rest of the world that they need to "make radical changes". Good luck with that.

I'm far from being in the 1%, however the things I've done personally so far is * Use public transportation to work (bus/train) * Drastically reduced meat consumption from every day to once a week. I still eat fish about twice a week. * Converted part of my garden (my house is 150 square meters so I wouldn't exactly call it a mansion) to a vegetable garden. * Make sure the food I do buy is produced locally, it is cle…

> Recently I've mostly use air due to work

I am wondering if you see any possibility to avoid work related air travel as well? I understand that certain jobs require flying but I also see, at least at my own company, that a lot of those flights are not really necessary and could easily be avoided. Would you mind to elaborate?

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#166

Post by valw »

jodrellblank wrote: post #157
valw wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've seen numerous promising business ideas to capture carbon and convert it into useful materials; I think it's more feasible to do that than to force veganism on every one. Yeah, we've all seen them - they make for fantastic headlines. None of them is as viable as protecting forests / planting trees by a long shot. They systematically fail to mention that the energy consumption is super high or that they're not s…

60% of America is overweight or obese, and America throws out enough food to feed .. a lot of people, every day. Shame me for eating meat when you stop them from overeating food full stop - and all the farm machinery and transport and packaging involved in that. I don't have children, I don't drive them to school in a SUV or to a holiday in DisneyWorld, I have never launched a SpaceX rocket, or lived on my own in a f…

> f' off about calling people "the most severe cause of climate change" for eating a beef sandwich without considering anything else. It's unhelpful, provocative, and completely incorrect.

That's an entire mischaracterization of my argument, which was about willingness to change one's lifestyle in general, not specifically about eating a beef sandwich.

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#167

Post by valw »

torpfactory wrote: post #116
valw wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Climate change requires a call to arms for everyone. Many scientific experts don't believe that enhanced technology can be the main solution. True, technology can be a part of the solution, but changing our values and life habits are much more important. That's why top recommended environmental measure is carbon taxes, not subsidizing energy efficiency. We've already made dramatic technological progress on our energy…

To be clear, I never said technology was the only solution. We have to parallel-path this entire enterprise. We need a change of culture and values just as much as technology. I'm not counting on only technology, but I really do believe we'll need both approaches here. As engineers, our part in this may be to create technological solutions. I hope culture thought leaders do their part and espouse a different way of l…

Yeah, I was saying this to add to what you said, not to disagree with you - sorry if I didn't make that very clear. I on the same quest as you are.

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#168

Post by noonespecial »

richev wrote: post #164
noonespecial wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"earth would be better off were we all dead" The right answer to this is "for who?" and "why would it matter then?" We don't save the earth for the earth. We save it for ourselves.

> We don't save the earth for the earth. We save it for ourselves. I was hoping that we were trying to save it (from us!) because this is simply the right thing to do.

Not trying to be the least bit facetious: What makes it the right thing to do?

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#169

Post by dr_dshiv »

midnitewarrior wrote: post #17

Telling a lie then saying 3 Hail Marys means you are forgiven for the lie, it doesn't fix the lie. As such, planting a tree to be forgiven for going on a flight that burns carbon-laden jet fuel doesn't fix what you did. Fossil fuels are excess carbon atoms sequestered safely deep inside the Earth. Unless you can find a way to put them back there, there's no fixing the situation. Planting a tree does capture carbon. H…

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I think we are at much more risk from people who believe that the best path forward is rapid human depopulation (are you really recommending that?) than those who believe in the contemporary utility of fossil fuels.

If anyone wonders why anyone could possibly be against the modern environmentalist movement, it may be because so many believe in the movement believe in "rapid depopulation" (though few will say it so directly as you).

Re: Cement Produces More Pollution Than All the Trucks in the World

#170

Post by NeedMoreTea »

icxa wrote: post #77
bin0 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only way this is happening is if the planet gets depopulated of humans rapidly. Please don't tell me you're one of those "earth would be better of were we all dead" people. I can't stand that kind of post-modernist, nihilistic garbage. I'm not mister optimist, but still, that's way too far. Also, that kind of rhetoric is going to end up being a justification for some one very evil doing some thing very bad. > T…

If these people really believed that overpopulation was the problem, then why don't they start depopulating with themselves? * It sounds terrible I know, but it serves to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the stance. Like George Carlin said, "I’m tired of these self-righteous environmentalists, these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is that there aren’t enough bicycle paths. Peopl…

Perhaps, having had no say in their own conception, it's reasonable to allow them as much a chance of a life as anyone else?

Overpopulation is clearly a problem, probably the problem, but you don't solve it by guilt induced suicide, mandated death or shipping people off to camps (not in the "civilised" world anyway). You discourage excess procreation. Tax after the first child, free birth control, and advertising campaigns should reduce numbers. After all many nations did all that in reverse to encourage more children, but they didn't make breeding compulsory. There is no hypocrisy in the stance. I'm sure there's other non-dystopian possible approaches that stay safely away from holocaust and eugenics.

The hypocrisy is pretending a finite planet has infinite space for expansion where we keep expanding until there is a catastrophic crash. Perhaps some wildlife will remain, perhaps not. Far better to have a controlled stop and seek to find a sustainable population - where earth can regenerate what we use, and we still have sustainable wildlife, insect, sea and plant populations and some wilderness.

Humanity keeps on demonstrating they can't do self-controlled, so your worldview wins. Future crash it will be then.

Post reply on HN