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

Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

france24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 102 posts

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#41

Post by timeon »

kieranmaine wrote: post #15
ncr100 wrote: post #6

I’m having a hard time contributing anything intellectually interesting. This is emotionally terrifying to me. What can be said?

You have to weigh up the negatives with the positives and look at trends. AI can gave you a more exhaustive list of positive developments, but some I've noticed: * "FERC: Solar + wind made up 91% of new US power generating capacity in H1 2025" [1] - The rollback of the IRA will reduce the speed of the US transition. * "Solar and wind growth exceeded global demand growth in the first half of 2025" [2] * Perovskite sol…

How does investing in new forms of energy help when old one is not decreasing? Demand for energy is still rising so those new forms are just covering (part of) new demand...

> AI can gave you a more exhaustive list

...so maybe it should not?

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#42

Post by [deleted] »

username223 wrote: post #39
DangitBobby wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of Americans can see and feel the effects of global warming, they just don't think addressing it is worth the effort.

Do they? Wildfires are some percent more likely and larger, but forests have always burned, and there are other factors like a century of fire suppression. Hurricanes are more violent and frequent, but there have always been hurricanes. Eggheads will tell you those things, but your day-to-day experiences of them are easy to dismiss. Watching a glacier die is visceral: https://maevethornberry.ie/wp-content/uploads/201…

[deleted]

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#43

Post by graeme »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #17
ncr100 wrote: post #6

I’m having a hard time contributing anything intellectually interesting. This is emotionally terrifying to me. What can be said?

China is building, domestically deploying, and exporting solar, wind, batteries, and EVs so fast that the world will have no choice but to rapidly move towards net zero simply due to economics. Existing excess atmospheric carbon emissions remain to be sequestered. China deployed 277GW of solar in 2024 and is accelerating, having deployed 212GW in the first half of 2025. 1GW of solar is being deployed globally every 1…

I hope so, but to do that it isn't enough to make renewables economical.

You also have to make carbon uneconomical. China's CO2 emissions have continued to increase rapidly along with renewables.

Energy is really useful and we don't have enough to fulfil demand. Unless renewables + nuclear are cheaper than carbon and not supply constrained I'd expect both sources to increase in tandem.

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#44

Post by caturopath »

username223 wrote: post #24

I have believed for years that Americans would have a completely different attitude to global warming if the Lower 48 had more glaciers. In the Alps, you can easily walk to places where there are 100m of ladders to reach a hut that used to be at the level of the ice. In Canada, you can drive to places that used to be the toe of a glacier, then drive another half-mile to the parking lot, built at the edge of the glaci…

Whenever I try to read up on it, it seems like glaciers are receding at ~2x their without-climate-change rate. That's a huge increase, but it doesn't seem like there's something that a person can experience at a visceral level here that is based on fact and not just preconception.

It's definitely striking, I can't deny that. I crossed the last remnants of an almost-extinct glacier last year that my guide guessed would be gone in 1-3 years: at the beginning of his career it was a real glacer with non-trivial extents, crevasses, etc.

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#45

Post by tonfa »

ahmeneeroe-v2 wrote: post #34
DangitBobby wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Production rates are subject to change. China is showing it wants to move towards a future where it emits less CO2 and the US recently elected and appointed cronies to take us in the opposite direction.

CO2 emissions by country: China vs US. Number only.

https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/which-countries-hav... I would be surprised if China ends up dumping more CO2 than the US (and then if we look at per capita, even more so).

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#46

Post by xandrius »

sys32768 wrote: post #12
simmerup wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess we can hope America starts taking climate change seriously again instead of chasing short term stock market returns

And China too with its ~30-31% of world CO2.

Let's forget how they make almost everything we and you own.

Until not long ago, they very likely even processed your own trash.

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#48

Post by toomuchtodo »

graeme wrote: post #43
toomuchtodo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is building, domestically deploying, and exporting solar, wind, batteries, and EVs so fast that the world will have no choice but to rapidly move towards net zero simply due to economics. Existing excess atmospheric carbon emissions remain to be sequestered. China deployed 277GW of solar in 2024 and is accelerating, having deployed 212GW in the first half of 2025. 1GW of solar is being deployed globally every 1…

I hope so, but to do that it isn't enough to make renewables economical. You also have to make carbon uneconomical. China's CO2 emissions have continued to increase rapidly along with renewables. Energy is really useful and we don't have enough to fulfil demand. Unless renewables + nuclear are cheaper than carbon and not supply constrained I'd expect both sources to increase in tandem.

> Energy is really useful and we don't have enough to fulfil demand.

Enough sunlight falls on Earth in ~30 min to power humanity for a year. There is currently a capture constraint, not a supply constraint, which is currently being solved for.

> Unless renewables + nuclear are cheaper than carbon and not supply constrained I'd expect both sources to increase in tandem.

Renewables are cheaper than carbon, even when accounting for storage, unsubsidized. Some will say "what about seasonal!?" Not solved for yet; fossil gas for the gaps until solar, wind, transmission, batteries, and demand response/orchestration keep closing that gap. Nuclear will never be cheap unfortunately.

https://ember-energy.org/latest-updates/24-hour-solar-now-ec...

https://www.surrey.ac.uk/news/solar-energy-now-worlds-cheape...

https://www.authorea.com/users/960972/articles/1329770-solar... | https://doi.org/10.22541/au.175647950.09188768/v1

(think in systems)

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#49

Post by ahmeneeroe-v2 »

tonfa wrote: post #45
ahmeneeroe-v2 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CO2 emissions by country: China vs US. Number only.

https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/which-countries-hav... I would be surprised if China ends up dumping more CO2 than the US (and then if we look at per capita, even more so).

CO2 since 1750! This isn't serious. Who is currently today doing the thing? china

Does the climate care about per capita? no

Re: Swiss glaciers have shrunk by a quarter since 2015, study says

#50

Post by ahmeneeroe-v2 »

DangitBobby wrote: post #40
ahmeneeroe-v2 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CO2 emissions by country: China vs US. Number only.

No idea, if you read my comment you'd understand that's not what I think matters.

That is not a serious position, that is a political position.
Post reply on HN