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

Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 1001 posts

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#561

Post by keewee7 »

bko wrote: post #447
jsonne wrote: post #360

If there is anything covid has taught me its that collective action isn't something we can rely on and is a lot more wishful thinking about the state of humanity rather than a sober look at the reality. Governments need to tax CO2 emissions on the business side and pour the money into carbon capture technology in the private space through investment and perhaps some sort of bounty program (you get $x for each ton you…

Believe it or not, western countries have reduced carbon emissions over the last ~15 years, in both absolute and per capita terms (despite a growing population). The only countries that are growing their carbon emissions are developing countries; mainly China, India and Russia. China is particularly troubling since they make up 28% of all emissions (US is 15%) and they have both a growing population and growing emiss…

Chinese rise in emissions is because of Western manufacturing.

Russian rise in emissions is because of Western European need for heating.

If we stop outsourcing manufacturing to China and stop buying gas from Russia their emissions will also fall.

But India and Africa are significantly poorer than China and Russia.

India and Africa should be allowed to emit CO2 for the next two decades or they will remain poor forever.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#562

Post by jdavis703 »

jsonne wrote: post #360

If there is anything covid has taught me its that collective action isn't something we can rely on and is a lot more wishful thinking about the state of humanity rather than a sober look at the reality. Governments need to tax CO2 emissions on the business side and pour the money into carbon capture technology in the private space through investment and perhaps some sort of bounty program (you get $x for each ton you…

COVID-19 was a program of systemic action. The US had lockdowns, mask mandates and even soft vaccine mandates. None of this was enough to crush the virus. Why? Because systems are made of individuals who will decide whether or not they want to collaborate on solving a problem.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#563

Post by Dumblydorr »

Joeri wrote: post #70
skinkestek wrote: post #31

So now we can get rid of fast fashion, mandate reusability for products, reintroduce basic woodworking, metalcrafting and sewing/repair work in school and with that get rid of a huge chunk of the needless shipping? Or are we still going to go after individuals eating traditional food while thought leaders fly across the globe in private jets (no kidding) telling us we need to change our diet? PS: I'm already a enthus…

Individual action won’t solve this problem. We need to leave the fossil fuels in the ground, which means switching energy sources, which is not something individuals have much influence on. Reducing energy use at the individual level is good, but insufficient if the energy used comes from fossil fuels. I’m not sure we need to switch lifestyles that much, but we will need to radically change energy production. There h…

Individual actions help, they aren't sufficient alone but if every citizen went vegan and didn't vacation, it would probably buy us a couple more years to transition our energy system. Every little bit helps, but I do agree industry is the low hanging and greater emitting fruit that must change first. For instance air conditioning, there are very potent greenhouse gasses in ACs, companies would do well to phase those out fully and quickly and dispose of them properly. A little government incentive there would be a massive win, much easier than telling humans not to travel.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#564

Post by adolph »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #386
belorn wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were a study done in Sweden a few years ago that looked at the question about an individuals actions and the corresponding CO2 production. No car > skipping flight > buy green energy > Get a electric car > diet. https://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/article/four-lifestyle-choi...

Of course the biggest emitters are industrial. Anything we attribute to individuals pales in comparison to the transport industry, production of goods like steel and concrete, resource extraction, power generation and production of consumer goods. Telling consumers to cut back on X is essentially passing the back and making consumers feel bad without actually addressing the bulk of emissions.

https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/browser/?tbl=T02.01#/?f...

Industrial is the largest energy consumer by sector, but doesn't pale in comparison to transportation, commercial and residential. If anything C19 has brought residential up to industrial levels.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#565

Post by epistasis »

verytrivial wrote: post #533
pmorici wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t Musk the climate change guy you are looking for. He’s done more to advance the cause of sustainable energy than perhaps anyone.

He gives electric transportation and storage with one hand, and takes away with the promise of literally thousand of ultra-low-efficiency fuel (methane) burning rocket launches with the other.

Musk's main climate sin is sabotaging real mass transit with ridiculous low-throughout pipe-dreams: his cars in small tunnels.

This is as much a sin against functional cities as it is against the climate.

Rocket launches really aren't bad at all in comparison. He could take one every single day without the same level of damage as stopping a single new transit line.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#566

Post by zejn »

smt88 wrote: post #268
zejn wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The easiest way to approach this is to "stop burning stuff". Is a material being burned? Then it almost certainly emits CO2. Do you call it fuel? Stop using it or use it as little as possible. Most personal energy use is for heating living spaces and transportation. EVs are great for transportation, e-bikes are even better. Heat pumps are great for heating and cooling living spaces. Using these one can drastically re…

Cows and concrete don't involve burning things, but they do produce a large percentage of total CO2 emissions.

Correct.

With meat the important thing is to know the turnaround time, eg. how much time does it take for an animal to reach adult size. Bigger animals tend to have longer lives. More lifetime means more food, water, energy.

Beef has really long turnaround time, pork is not much better, poultry is quite good, insects are really hard to beat. Eggs are also a great source of protein. Having your own chicken coop is not a bad idea, if you have the space for it.

Cement is problematic because the CO2 comes from the process even if you use non-CO2 emitting fuels for heating up the raw materials, which eventually become cement. Alternative to cement is to use wood for construction, which I think is quite popular in the US.

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#567

Post by NumberWangMan »

zejn wrote: post #178
Joeri wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Individual action won’t solve this problem. We need to leave the fossil fuels in the ground, which means switching energy sources, which is not something individuals have much influence on. Reducing energy use at the individual level is good, but insufficient if the energy used comes from fossil fuels. I’m not sure we need to switch lifestyles that much, but we will need to radically change energy production. There h…

Individuals can and should reduce their direct CO2 footprint. Most of personal energy budget goes for transportation and heating and/or cooling the living spaces. Two solutions enable you to stop directly burning stuff: EVs and heatpumps. Beyond that, cap-and-trade scheme has worked to reduce SO2 emissions and it will work to reduce CO2 emissions.

One issue with individual action, in the absence of a market incentive such as cap-and-trade or a carbon tax, is that reducing your use of power/fossil fuels reduces demand, thus ever so slightly reducing prices, which will give others licence to use more. It doesn't 100% cancel out your efforts, but it does reduce the effect.

One issue with EVs is that they aren't necessarily a feasible option for a lot of households due to their cost. Putting a market incentive in place would lead to a hundred different ways of reducing our CO2 emissions from driving, not limited by the ingenuity of one person or organization. More people working from home, more carpooling, distributed co-working spaces, more use of public transportation, even shifting how we design and zone our towns and cities, are a few things I can think of.

I strongly recommend that anyone who wants to take a very direct, immediate, simple action to move the USA toward having a carbon fee and dividend policy* take a look at this (or at the very least, send it to your environmentally concerned friends and family): https://citizensclimatelobby.org/senate/

(*a tax on carbon, where, that get returned to all citizens so as to reduce or even eliminate impact on lower income families)

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#569

Post by adolph »

agumonkey wrote: post #342
rich_sasha wrote: post #170

It’s just so hard to know what actions have what impact on CO2 production. Some are high-pain, low-gain (switching devices off instead of standby?), some are opposite (cycling instead of driving when possible etc). For that if for no other reason, I’d rather if consumer prices included an explicit CO2 tax. The here can be a rebate for poorer people, or personal allowance, whatever, but there would be a fixed yardstic…

Fair point, it's blurry From the top of my head, most cited ones are Concrete production Heating / cooling (unless designed to be physically smart) Beef production Worldwide transportation (fruits all year long) Cars If you eat a Mediterranean die, move by foot or bike and have a well insulated house with no AC you're good

Why pick on AC? How about adding no heat?

Re: Climate change: IPCC report is 'code red for humanity'

#570

Post by thehappypm »

keewee7 wrote: post #561
bko wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Believe it or not, western countries have reduced carbon emissions over the last ~15 years, in both absolute and per capita terms (despite a growing population). The only countries that are growing their carbon emissions are developing countries; mainly China, India and Russia. China is particularly troubling since they make up 28% of all emissions (US is 15%) and they have both a growing population and growing emiss…

Chinese rise in emissions is because of Western manufacturing. Russian rise in emissions is because of Western European need for heating. If we stop outsourcing manufacturing to China and stop buying gas from Russia their emissions will also fall. But India and Africa are significantly poorer than China and Russia. India and Africa should be allowed to emit CO2 for the next two decades or they will remain poor foreve…

Wait. Are you saying that Russian gas, combusted in the EU, counts towards Russia's CO2 output? that makes zero sense.
Post reply on HN