Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat • Hacker News Board

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#161

Post by bongodongobob » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:40 PM UTC

mr_person wrote: post #34

cromulent wrote: post #2

A friend of mine who lives in Queensland (Sunshine Coast) was talking about a recent spell of 32° and 100% humidity and how oppressive it was. My understanding is that such weather is not survivable long term [1] without air conditioning. A power failure would be disastrous. [1] https://www.psu.edu/news/research/story/humans-cant-endure-t...

Can confirm. Its disgusting. I am also a grumpy fart right now because the night time temperature has not dropped below 20degrees since, like, November[1]. If I tried to aircon that like I do most of the day time, I would wake up a sinusy coughing mess... Sure, 30degrees and 90+ humidity is survivable, but only just. [1] https://7news.com.au/news/brisbane-set-to-break-record-of-da...

You're allergic to air conditioning? I don't understand.

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#162

Post by chiefalchemist » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:41 PM UTC

Humanity? Really? If so, it's because of such newspeak. To be clear, it's primarily The West and primarily greed (i.e., profits at all costs) that are conducting this experiment. What is this? A reprint of a press release from Big Oil and Big Ag? And Big Gov?

Most of the billions didn't choose it. A good chunk of the billions aren't even aware.

Shame on you Wired for diluting the accountability and giving those who should be blamed a free pass.

Sheeshhhhhh. Humanity? My arse.

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#163

Post by lakomen » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:44 PM UTC

We all know this, but what's the point when not enough is being done to make our habitat better or at least not make it largely inhabitable. And in some cases, looking at Australia, it's gone full throttle CO2, like it's not sitting in a glasshouse already.

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#164

Post by thworp » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:44 PM UTC

mempko wrote: post #146

thworp wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's not that complex. We found a cheap source of carbon based energy. Growth based economics pushed us to use and exploit the source. This created a lot of pollution. And now the planet is getting a lot warmer. I think people say 'it's complex' to avoid talking about the obvious solution.

I'll assume the "obvious solution" is a cold-turkey (or over the next 10 years) complete or almost complete cessation of all CO2 emmissions.

Where will the fertilizer come from? What happens to the parts supply chain and fuel sources of agricultural machines? How will we make concrete and steel in the quantities we need? How will we transport food across continents? In summary: How can we do that without a death toll of tens of millions?

I mean we are slowly working on it, solar+storage is now just the most cost-efficient source of electricity. But anyone that thinks it is simple or obvious either doesn't inhabit the real world, or is a murderous psychopath.

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#165

Post by _heimdall » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:44 PM UTC

seiferteric wrote: post #159

_heimdall wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before we start filling our atmosphere with theoretical solutions, shouldn't we reduce as much of emissions and consumption and possible? We humans consume an insane amount of natural resources. We have built many of our societies around global interdependence. We produce a constant flood of stuff that is consumed quickly and discarded. We could make a big impact simply shifting to more local economies. For example,…

This would take decades at least, we need something else in our back pocket in case millions start to die from heat exhaustion. Even if somehow we stop all CO2 emissions today, the earth will continue to warm for like a couple more centuries.

What would take decades? Nearly every business switched to work from home in a matter of weeks because the fear of a pandemic gripped most politicians. Why couldn't we do that now to reduce our use of oil?

The fact is we have a massive amount of waste in the system that we just aren't willing to give up. How much could be saved if we didn't expect that every McDonalds in the country could provide the exact same menu anytime, anywhere? Or if we stopping buying new cloths just to kill time? Or if we no longer had holiday traditions based entirely on consumerism of gifts that almost certainly weren't built to last and we didn't need in the first place?

None of this has to be all or nothing, but it does require societies to tilt the scales on how highly we prioritize modern economics and convenience. We don't have to get rid of all use of oil, cars, gift giving, etc. We just need to decide that reducing our use as much as possible is worth the effort.

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#166

Post by bongodongobob » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:45 PM UTC

ImHereToVote wrote: post #145

ponector wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who should pay for it? No one really wants to spend money on something like that. People don't want to spend 0.1% of GDP to help survive people in Ukraine and you think they care how hot is there for the people of Australia?

Is there any evidence to support the case that sending more weapons to Ukraine will spare lives? If so. Shouldn't we prioritize sending weapons to the people of Gaza first, since their casualty numbers are much higher?

Sending aid to Ukraine isn't just a thing we do for fun. It's the tradeoff for them giving up their nuclear arsenal. We said we'd have their backs. Money is probably better than sending people's kids.

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#167

Post by cromulent » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:45 PM UTC

richrichie wrote: post #132

cromulent wrote: post #2

A friend of mine who lives in Queensland (Sunshine Coast) was talking about a recent spell of 32° and 100% humidity and how oppressive it was. My understanding is that such weather is not survivable long term [1] without air conditioning. A power failure would be disastrous. [1] https://www.psu.edu/news/research/story/humans-cant-endure-t...

32 deg C is a mild summer in many parts of the world and most of that world does not have 24/7 electricity, even from coal. Incidentally, pro tennis players descend in Melbourne during the peak of Australian summer and play best of 5 sets (men) in the heat where temperatures reach high forties (deg C) and even fifties.

Of course, high temperatures on their own are fine. The temperature is not the only factor, it is the humidity. Wet-bulb temperature is the key indicator.

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#168

Post by jijijijij » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:47 PM UTC

chasil wrote: post #111

jijijijij wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing to think about, is how poorly developed, rural places, without ACs or stable grids , are much more likely to experience heat waves with universally fatal wet-bulb temperatures. Places like parts of India or Bangladesh with high population densities, too. Further more, I think, we also need to consider how non-survivable conditions to humans, may play out for other animals we depend on. The cows, chicken, sh…

As opposed to our current icehouse phase, plants have thrived during intense greenhouse periods of global climate. "Earth has been in a greenhouse state for about 85% of its history... Earth is now in an icehouse state, and ice sheets are present in both poles simultaneously." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_and_icehouse_Eart...

We're not talking about the overall greenhouse situation, but particular regions experiencing high wet-bulb temperatures, or intense heat waves, and acute plant resilience in relation to human survivability.

I am very aware some plants can manage and adapt. But for example there is a difference between C3 and C4 plants in regard to heat tolerance and distribution. The question is, can all plants manage in a given region, in a given moment of time, with a shift in competitive advantage for certain organisms around? Geological or evolutionary time scales are irrelevant, here, since we're talking about the years to come - a human life time.

A temporary disturbance of a single factor may kill an ecosystem. For example eutrophication in lakes may lead to algae bloom, killing all other plants, fish and animals around. Or the extermination of the wolf, or another top predator, leads to overgrowth of deer, or another important prey animal, which then will eat all the young trees, which leads to receding forests, leading to increased soil erosion by wind, and leading to decreased rainfall, which ultimately leads to desertification or aridification.

An instant 10% increased fitness for some opportunistic fungi could wreak havoc in a particular ecosystem. 10% decreased fitness for a local tree species, too. A general loss of diversity may lead to bad adaptability for periodic stress events.

But you won't find evidence of these isolated catastrophes in fossils or drill cores. You don't see the farewell messages from all those species who didn't make it.

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#169

Post by seiferteric » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:48 PM UTC

_heimdall wrote: post #165

seiferteric wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would take decades at least, we need something else in our back pocket in case millions start to die from heat exhaustion. Even if somehow we stop all CO2 emissions today, the earth will continue to warm for like a couple more centuries.

What would take decades? Nearly every business switched to work from home in a matter of weeks because the fear of a pandemic gripped most politicians. Why couldn't we do that now to reduce our use of oil? The fact is we have a massive amount of waste in the system that we just aren't willing to give up. How much could be saved if we didn't expect that every McDonalds in the country could provide the exact same menu…

I don't mean to be rude, but are you aware that CO2 emissions continue to _increase_ year after year? That despite the world's apparent effort, we have actually made _no_ progress in reducing our greenhouse gas emissions globally? Given this reality, how do you expect to achieve your goals in a reasonable time-frame?

Re: Humanity Is Dangerously Pushing Its Ability to Tolerate Heat

#170

Post by codebolt » Mon, Mar 11, 2024, 1:49 PM UTC

jijijijij wrote: post #54

codebolt wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the hysteria was overblown, and we instead sabotaged an opportunity for many of the people living near the equator to become more prosperous.

> an opportunity for many of the people living near the equator to become more prosperous Please tell us, what you have in mind. More economic growth?

As someone who frequents poorer regions of West Africa, that is exactly what I had in mind. Economic growth driven by increased use of hydrocarbons could massively help the populations there.