51–60 of 118 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Weather is not climate...
It's crazy that there are still people who don't get this. "It's cold here, so there's no such thing as global warming." They forget that the other hemisphere is on fire.
Not only the climate is warmer than models anticipated, we're doing worse to prevent it than pessimistic expectations.
Not only that, we're approaching a massive tipping point in just a couple of weeks. Some of the "poser pontificators" claim to be concerned about the climate, yet they're not even sure they will vote. If you have relatives in college in MI, WI, PA, NC, GA, NV or AZ who are concerned about the climate, get them to shake off the stupor.
If you think the "business-as-usual" climate mitigations will be insufficient, it may be worthwhile to go for high-variance approaches that leave humanity better able to react relatively quickly to unexpectedly large warming.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_sunshade#Lightweight_sol...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Far more problematic are the effects on farming of a degree rise. Temperature and co2 increases are beneficial to plant growth. What is the problematic aspect you are referring to?
Extreme rain, extreme drought. And that degree rise is on average it's going to be much worse in some place. Just look at the production if coffee recently, its a catastrophe.
For the 2024-25 financial year, India has exported 2.2 lakh tonnes of coffee, up from 1.91 lakh tonnes in the same period last year, showcasing a 15 percent increase.
https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/money/indian-coffee-exp...
Capitalism is now trying to avoid doing the absolute minimum that we would need to do if the climate catastrophe shall be avoided. In fact I am convinced that if you had to invent a system that that optimized a societies reaction to climate annihilation in such a way that it does the bare minimum as predicted to be needed by climate models it would probably look a lot like what we have today. The inly issue with that…
[flagged]
Disclaimer: I don't give a fuck about China but you're objectively full of shit
China is only communist in the name, "state capitalism" describes it better. In some aspects it's very similar to how the US operated during war times, just milder. If you think China abolished private property and that Chinese people own the means of productions you probably haven't looked very hard... It's the second country in term of numbers of millionaires and they have hundred thousands of private companies
China is actually doing a lot in term of clean energy, if you (we) didn't use them as the world factory they'd pollute way less. It's both the first producer and the one that moves at the fastest pace. btw per capita China pollutes about 50% less than the US (and about as much as the EU average), while they manufacture and ship a huge part of what is consumed in the US/EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable...
> China produced 31% of global renewable electricity, followed by the United States (11%), Brazil (6.4%), Canada (5.4%) and India (3.9%)
https://www.irena.org/Data/View-data-by-topic/Capacity-and-G...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Far more problematic are the effects on farming of a degree rise. Temperature and co2 increases are beneficial to plant growth. What is the problematic aspect you are referring to?
Extreme rain, extreme drought. And that degree rise is on average it's going to be much worse in some place. Just look at the production if coffee recently, its a catastrophe.
PS coffee like many other plants can't be farmed "just 100km higher up" or something. There may be easier solutions for some crops, but the reality is, the climate is not simply shifting a few kilometers up, but just changes completely so finding another suitable spot - geographically politically and all, is a real challenge.
The skeptical view: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYhCQv5tNsQ
There may have been skeptics 20 years ago, but now no one seriously doubts it.
I don't understand how technology people make decisions to deny a problem even if there is no 100% certainty. In my company, even if there is less than a 1% chance of something going wrong, we have to think of ways to mitigate it.