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

Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 166 posts

Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood

#51

Post by Xiol »

pocksuppet wrote: post #37
zug_zug wrote: post #12

> Humans evolved in an atmosphere containing roughly 280–300 ppm of CO₂. The average annual increase over the past decade has been about 2.6 ppm per year, with 2024 recording a 3.5 ppm rise. So currently we're at 428 with 3.5 increase per year, yeah, that's scary if it doesn't slow down soon. Makes you wonder about what indirect health side-effects that could have on us.

Chronic exposure to CO2 levels above normal but below acute toxicity makes us dumber and more irritable.

Good job we can outsource all our thinking to an agent, now.

Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood

#52

Post by hxorr »

This is compounded by modern lifestyle factors such as staying indoors more, keeping the windows closed to help the aircon/heating be more efficient, etc.

I think a lot of people would be surprised at the CO2 level in different indoor environments they spend time in each day.

Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood

#53

Post by jbboehr »

pluralmonad wrote: post #35
slibhb wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Never heard this take before. Care to elaborate? It seems like crop failure and disease are the typical causes of food shortages, if not outright human logistical failures. Sounds like saying pouring gasoline on a tiny fire is the only reason we aren't cold (ignoring that more firewood would be the solution). An unsustainable solution is not in-fact a good solution. So if your assertion is correct, then we should all…

> Green Revolution techniques also heavily rely on agricultural machinery and chemical fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and defoliants; which, as of 2014, are derived from crude oil, making agriculture increasingly reliant on crude oil extraction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution

Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood

#54

Post by slibhb »

pluralmonad wrote: post #35
slibhb wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Never heard this take before. Care to elaborate? It seems like crop failure and disease are the typical causes of food shortages, if not outright human logistical failures. Sounds like saying pouring gasoline on a tiny fire is the only reason we aren't cold (ignoring that more firewood would be the solution). An unsustainable solution is not in-fact a good solution. So if your assertion is correct, then we should all…

You clearly haven't given a lot of thought to questions like "where does all this cheap food/housing/heating come from?"

The fact that fossil fuels -- since their mass adoption in the late 19th century -- are the single largest cause of improved living conditions is standard economic history.

> An unsustainable solution is not in-fact a good solution.

It was a perfectly good solution. It replaced wood fires which are clearly worse. Coal was great until natural gas became available. As solar/wind/nuclear become abundant, they are conintuing to displace fossil fuels.

Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood

#56

Post by lapcat »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #45
lapcat wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obama takes credit for U.S. oil-and-gas boom: ‘That was me, people’ https://apnews.com/article/business-5dfbc1aa17701ae219239caa... You have to be born yesterday to believe that Democratic leaders haven't merely hand-waved and virtue-signaled about global warming for decades. I realized this back in the 1990s. Democrats have superior rhetoric, and they are less openly hostile, but their long record of doing nothing t…

You do the people causing this problem a great service with false equivocations like this. It is clear one group would prefer us to ignore the problem and do nothing at all - in fact encourage the problematic behavior - and the other would very much like to take action on the issue if they had the political power.

> the other would very much like to take action on the issue if they had the political power.

They had political power! During the Biden administration, during the Obama administration, during the Clinton administration.

Al Gore is a famous environmentalist... for making a movie after he was out of power. What the hell did he do for the environment when he was literally in the Oval Office, at the side of the President?

Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood

#58

Post by Tade0 »

indoordin0saur wrote: post #2

This actually has me just as concerned as rising temperatures. And its a pretty hard thing to argue against, no matter your politics. Elon even brought it up when he did that interview with Trump in late 2024 to convince him that we should still care about CO2 levels in the atmosphere, even if you think the threat of a changing climate is overblown. Trump really had no response.

USA (along with the rest of the western world) is a huge cumulative emitter:

https://ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2

But a distant second in per year emissions:

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by...

The EU, not listed here, sits between the US and India at about 3.05 billion tonnes.

It's all up to China, which took over a huge chunk of the world's manufacturing. And all up to us, buying Chinese products.

Re: Rising carbon dioxide levels now detected in human blood

#60

Post by slibhb »

microsoftedging wrote: post #38
slibhb wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Op was referencing a comic [0] Furthermore, yes, getting to the point where we're no longer starving and in thatched huts did require fossil fuels, but now we know what they do, and that they're actively having an effect on the environment, and clearly us, are we so stuck in our ways we can't change our actions to secure a life for those that come after? [0] https://www.bureauofinternetculture.art/memes/shareholder-v…

What difference does it make what they're referencing?

I'm glad we agree that fossil fuels were necessary. It has nothing to do with "shareholder value" -- it has to do with minimizing human suffering.

Also, it's noteworthy that US emissions peaked in 2007. We're down ~20% since then. The world is absolutely addressing climate change, and the worst case scenarios have already been avoided. Faster would be better but we're moving reasonably fast.

Post reply on HN