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

What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

newhumanist.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 183 posts

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#61

Post by andrewwhartion »

erik wrote: post #53
andrewwhartion wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quick 'back of the envelope' (literally) calculations: Toyota Camry [0] Dual VVT-i engine gets 7.9L/100km and 183gm/km emissions. That roughly works out as 2.3kg CO2 per 1L petrol. Therefore, a tonne of CO2 is produced for every ~430L petrol. Petrol is around AUD $1.40/L, so about AUD $600 of petrol. Carbon credits [1] are worth about $14 euros per tonne of CO2, which is say AUD $19. Therefore 'carbon neutral' petrol…

Your comment sent me down a bit of a rabbit hole. I was confused about how burning 1L of fuel, which weighs ~1kg, could possibly produce ~2.3kg of CO2. (This page confirms Toyota's number: http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11 ) The answer, which took me far too long to realize, is that the oxygen pulled from the air makes up the bulk of the mass of the CO2. Oxygen has an atomic mass of ~16 to Carbon's ~1…

Yeah, I did a double take when I saw the number as well, then realized there's an O2 in CO2..

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#62

Post by pg314 »

weq wrote: post #47
greglindahl wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Become a vegetarian. Not only will you not contribute to the fish market, but you'll also reduce the amount of fertilizer flowing into the ocean.

Soy beans / palm oil are one of the top causes of deforestration in rainforests around the world. Being vego doesnt mean good for the planet, although yes, probably the main cause of desforestation is beef production... The permafrost is melting. coral reefs around the world are dieing. Its only a matter of years until fish populations to collapse (coral reefs house 75% of the world fish). Unfortunately the writing i…

> Soy beans / palm oil are one of the top causes of deforestration in rainforests around the world.

75% of soy beans are used as animal feed [1].

[1] http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/footprint/agriculture/soy/so...

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#63

Post by stinos »

danvdragos wrote: post #42

Reading this struck me: What is the difference between primordial volcanoes and human pollution? During the dinosaur age it was a lot hotter [0] and there were really extraordinary organisms. Further reading seems to go down a rabbit hole [1],etc. [0] http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2014/07/11/what-geology-has-to-... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2010/apr/21/ice...

I always thought there's way more human pollution than the amounts casued by a couple of volcano activity here and there? A quick search turns up multiple responses like this one:

Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes--the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)

Granted this is just about CO2, but I wouldn't be suprised if the same principle applies to other pollution.

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#64

Post by sjy »

anotherturn wrote: post #12
greglindahl wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Become a vegetarian. Not only will you not contribute to the fish market, but you'll also reduce the amount of fertilizer flowing into the ocean.

To make a dent I suspect becoming a vegetarian isn't enough - you'd have to become an effective-evangelical vegetarian. So, given that fear and shock tactics are failing - how do I convince the world (or a sizeable portion of it) to become vegetarian? I heard a podcast recently about a guy working to produce real meat from plant matter. This would probably be an effective solution. By spending time otherwise used for…

It is unrealistic to expect that any one person could convince a sizeable portion of the world to become vegetarian, but simply by being one you can influence others without being evangelical. I would not have become a vegetarian without the passive influence of friends who demonstrated that it was possible (and easy!), without actively encouraging me to switch. Being a vegetarian also reduces the amount of meat consumed by people who I cook for, or who prepare food for a group that includes me.

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#65

Post by seszett »

sporkenfang wrote: post #26
im3w1l wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are living the Malthusian dystopia and the solution is as trivial to state as it is impossible to implement. A global one child policy.

Oddly, I think outright banning fossil fuel refinement and usage would do more. Being an only child seems to be a bit psychologically damaging. I could conjecture for pages here, but suffice it to say I believe one is better off having 2-3 children or none at all. Sure there can be situations like being raised closely with cousins or friends that are similarly beneficial, but kids absolutely must have close companion…

> This is only the opinion of one person, take it however you wish.

As someone who is supposed to be unable to be empathetic, I kinda wonder how you came to have this opinion.

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#66

Post by masklinn »

danvdragos wrote: post #42

Reading this struck me: What is the difference between primordial volcanoes and human pollution? During the dinosaur age it was a lot hotter [0] and there were really extraordinary organisms. Further reading seems to go down a rabbit hole [1],etc. [0] http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2014/07/11/what-geology-has-to-... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2010/apr/21/ice...

> During the dinosaur age it was a lot hotter [0] and there were really extraordinary organisms.

1. there were also no humans, we evolved during a relatively dry and cold period and for the most part that's what we (and our current globe-spanning civilisation) are adapted for. That's also very convenient as heat and humidity are parasite havens.

2. the second issue is rate of change, globe-spanning temperature changes generally happen on geological timescale not generational ones, and in the latter case they usually triggered massive extinctions.

Neither of these is beneficial to us as a species.

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#67

Post by sjy »

jacobush wrote: post #52
im3w1l wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has been the trend so far. But I would be cautious about extrapolating too aggressively from that. A situation with rich people that aren't breeding is not evolutionarily stable.

What does that even mean?

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

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#68

Post by Thiez »

danvdragos wrote: post #42

Reading this struck me: What is the difference between primordial volcanoes and human pollution? During the dinosaur age it was a lot hotter [0] and there were really extraordinary organisms. Further reading seems to go down a rabbit hole [1],etc. [0] http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2014/07/11/what-geology-has-to-... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2010/apr/21/ice...

As the sun gets older, it becomes more and more luminous [0], so concentrations of CO2 that didn't cause a runaway greenhouse process in the past may do so in the future, because we're getting more sunlight. While this effect is not really noticeable when looking at recent history, once you start going back millions or billions of years it starts to become significant.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_evolution_%28Englis...

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#69

Post by staticelf »

anotherturn wrote: post #10

It's not really enough to read and upvote, but I'm at a loss as to what I can personally can do about this. So in the spirit of the askhn "how would you turn around Twitter" - let's apply the same thinking to this: "how would you fix the oceans "? There must be some practical steps that one or many of the hn audience can execute?

Do not eat meat, become a vegetarian. Drive less or get an electric car. For your household, get clean energy. Do not use plastic when not needed. Repair your products instead of purchasing new ones. Recycle. Etc.

Re: What fossil fuels are doing to our oceans

#70

Post by mavhc »

andrewwhartion wrote: post #40
cpprototypes wrote: post #27

I wish some billionaire would start a chain of carbon neutral gas stations. I wouldn't mind paying more for gas if I knew it was carbon neutral. There are several ways the gas could be carbon neutral, either through production (solar/wind into fuel creation) or offsets (plant trees or carbon sequestration). Instead of slowly trying to change our transportation infrastructure to EV, which will take decades, this could…

Quick 'back of the envelope' (literally) calculations: Toyota Camry [0] Dual VVT-i engine gets 7.9L/100km and 183gm/km emissions. That roughly works out as 2.3kg CO2 per 1L petrol. Therefore, a tonne of CO2 is produced for every ~430L petrol. Petrol is around AUD $1.40/L, so about AUD $600 of petrol. Carbon credits [1] are worth about $14 euros per tonne of CO2, which is say AUD $19. Therefore 'carbon neutral' petrol…

This is what confuses me, if it only costs 10% more to fix the problem, why the hell is it still a problem?
Post reply on HN