Live data from Hacker News

We are ‘greening’ ourselves to extinction

aljazeera.com

181–190 of 209 posts

Re: We are ‘greening’ ourselves to extinction

#181
post #67

Some of what the author says is accurate. Carbon offset credits are bunk. Industrial agriculture is harmful. There are environmental issues to a lot of the “greening” practices. There are issues around how equitably the climate change revolution is going to impact different demographics. Some of what the author says is false. Consumer choices do make a difference. I work in climate tech and the product my company pro…

“Electric vehicles are progress… has the potential to become renewable” How do you contradict yourself so quickly and not see it? Our electric cars aren’t using “renewable energy” (what a shifty term). They’re using oil being converted to electric energy (at a cost of losing some of the efficiency) Maybe someday these cars will use energy purely generated from the sun or wind, but given the volume of cars in the plan…

> They’re using oil being converted to electric energy

Classic conservative talking point. The next bit after this is "let's do nothing, gas burning cars are the future!". Anyone who actually wants to think for real about what the energy usage of an electric vehicle in their area is can refer to the EPA's Power Profiler: https://www.epa.gov/egrid/power-profiler#/

If you're in California, about half is gas. The other half is primarily nuclear, solar, wind and hydro. Transmission losses from power plant to home, and home to charged battery, are 10-20%; but then, electric drivetrains lose much less to efficiency than gas drivetrains. At the end of the day, emissions from driving an electric are better pretty much anywhere in the world; and in most places, massively better.

I think saying that electric "has the potential to become renewable" is quite reasonable. It'll certainly take a lot of time and isn't a certainty, but the generation mix is probably, all in all, an easier problem than the emissions from manufacturing batteries.

Re: We are ‘greening’ ourselves to extinction

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A return to the technical limitations and lifestyles of somewhere between 3000 BCE and 1400 CE would do. Maybe live like the Amish do. Fewer people would be supported, true, but we'd still dominate all other lifeforms.

IT would be hard to convince people to stop procreating en masse

That's why giving up is so attractive. We will procreate our way beyond all sustainability. Our economies have been arranged to require continual population growth, only disease and war correct it. When populations stabilize or drop, the call goes out to get people from Africa and the Middle East where birthrates are high.

So continual world war seems the only way to become sustainable.

Re: We are ‘greening’ ourselves to extinction

#185
post #127

> But this fallacy has been repeatedly exposed. For one, the organisations that are supposed to certify that indeed enough tree-planting has taken place do not have the tools to verify that the declared emissions will definitely be absorbed. Another problem is that many offsetting activities do not actually offset anything. > A recent investigation into the world’s largest carbon standard found that 94 percent of its…

I think the environmental movement went seriously awry by aligning itself with socialist political goals. Socialism is nothing more than a way to monopolize corporate power for tremendous profits. Climate ideals of limiting carbon also diverted attention from real-world pollution concerns - like harm from large-scale mining operations.

Oh man, attacking "socialism" by invoking profits. Saying carbon limiting efforts do not align with concerns about mining. Implying limiting carbon isn't an important goal.

Woof.

Re: We are ‘greening’ ourselves to extinction

#187
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You can't replace it in XX years" is particularly true if you don't even try. Everything we use oil and gas for that is not fuel is a tiny fraction of our consumption and can be replaced with synthesis pipelines that use carbon dioxide, water and electricity.

Besides fuel for transportation, the following make up a large use-case: blast furnaces for smelting steel and making coke, cement-making, ammonia synthesis, creating plastics. Electricity by itself accounts for near 25% of fossil fuel use. None of those can be viably replaced right now. With very large transpo, there seems to be a lot of investment in hydrogen but skepticism surrounding it too, including for the env…

If we could replace those things right now we would already have done so. That is no argument against investing into technologies that can replace those uses.

And I count furnaces, cement making, and electricity production as fuel, since all you need for the process is heat.

Re: We are ‘greening’ ourselves to extinction

#188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half of all car trips in the US are under 3 miles.[0] If even a quarter of already existing roads were turned over for use by pedestrians and cyclists, then most people could accomplish those trips without driving with little to no new infrastructure investment. That would substantially reduce our use of gas for transportation overnight, save hundreds of millions of dollars, and millions of tons of CO2 emissions. It…

Do you have neighbors in USA who will walk three miles to the grocery store? USA is ridiculously obese, so those walks would be good in many ways.

Walking and driving are not the only two options.

Re: We are ‘greening’ ourselves to extinction

#189
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The climate has always changed. Predicting the climate getting warmer when coming out of a mini ice age is hardly ground breaking. We were promised Manhattan would be underwater by now, that glaciers would be gone. https://nypost.com/2020/01/10/the-telling-tale-of-glacier-na...

This is cherrypicking. Sure, predictions vary and some turn out to be too pessimistic, others too optimistic. The general trend is clear however and has been for decades.

Cherrypicking is exactly what both sides do. Every extreme weather event is now pointed at as "evidence". It would be nice to have both sides heard and debated instead of the hysteria led media we get.

Look into Bjorn Lomborg. I have no idea how accurate his stuff is, but he is the only one that actually seems to take a pragmatic approach to the problem and looks at the bigger picture

Re: We are ‘greening’ ourselves to extinction

#190
post #22
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Models. Prediction with no long term history of being correct. It's a doomsday cult. I would recommend going back to watch Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth and see how many of the catastrophic predictions have come true.

This is a false dichotomy.

Modern day crystal ball reading with some complicated maths to give it the air of credibility
Post reply on HN