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

Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 179 posts

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#71

Post by ageofwant »

eggy wrote: post #55
ageofwant wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not meaningless. Its millions of tons of plastic less, it may be the 2% margin that matters.

I read the book Guesstimation 2.0 by Lawrence Weinstein a few years ago, and it had this breakdown. This is not addressing any other fact than how much time people spend worrying about the wrong thing, thinking emotionally rather than rationally or mathematically: "Paper or Plastic? How many plastic bags does the US use in one year? 10 bags per grocery store trip x 2 trips per week x 52 weeks per year = 1000 bags per…

I commented meaning to address plastic pollution and its direct affect on the biosphere. China's pollution may destroy 98% of foo species, America's plastic may push foo to extinction.

I agree that focus are many times misdirected and ineffective, but that's no reason not to try.

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#72

Post by nothrabannosir »

mooreds wrote: post #36
xfactor973 wrote: post #32

I planted about 50 fruit trees and bushes when I moved into my new place. I also converted the electric to 100% renewable. Other than dumping my natural gas heater I'm not sure what's left that I can do to help reduce climate change.

What is your commute like? What politicians do you support? Those are both ways you can affect climate change.

I see a lot of down-vote worthy responses to OP, and more downvotes. But in this case, I honestly don't see it: why is this not a fair question? I mean, in a genuinely neutral sense; isn't he right?

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#73

Post by downandout »

blondie9x wrote: post #6
appleflaxen wrote: post #3

There is a whole lot of climate change evidence coming out that is terrifying. At what point does this become so scary that something happens to increase the taxes on fossil fuels so that consumption will go down? Falling renewable prices are not enough, and use-based taxes are the single best way to let individuals make their own decisions about what/how much to use. Carbon credits are a good market-based solution t…

So true. Washington is too tainted by vested interests that seek to procrastinate shift. Time has literally run out. From here we are already in catch up mode. It seems like a revolution is necessary to stop them from acting against humanity's long term existence for their short term financial gain.

>Washington is too tainted by vested interests

One could say this about both sides of this issue. Clean tech has utilized an enormous amount of lobbying and been given substantial subsidies as a result - despite the lack of appreciable results.

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#74

Post by aqme28 »

fche wrote: post #42
banach wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop eating animal-based food. See http://www.cowspiracy.com/ for details.

Cowspiracy's points on GHG emission and water consumption are simply illiterate. They don't recognize the concept of a net flow. (e.g.: carbon that comes out of a cow first went into a cow - via its food - which got apprx. all its carbon from the air)

Cows produce a lot of methane, which is far worse than carbon dioxide.

Additionally, something has to ship all that food to the cows.

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#75

Post by ageofwant »

fche wrote: post #64
ageofwant wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fertilisers and fuel did not come from the air. There are hundreds of millions of cows (and other livestock) that did not exist before. Landscapes have been sterilised to support them with a massive resulting freeing of previously captured carbon, or carbon trapped in a slow cycle. Methane from ruminants are a significant source of CO2 and are not easily recaptured, not to mention a potent greenhouse gas.

"Fertilisers and fuel did not come from the air." True, and they are probably at least a small net flow into the atmosphere. But: "There are hundreds of millions of cows (and other livestock) that did not exist before." ... that part doesn't matter: agriculture is by nature carbon-neutral (except if you count mechanization aspects like fertilizers + fuel).

Agriculture is most certainly not carbon-neutral by nature, even with your exclusions. CH4 is persistent and not readily available for photosynthesis.

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#76

Post by DanBC »

ageofwant wrote: post #52
fche wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cowspiracy's points on GHG emission and water consumption are simply illiterate. They don't recognize the concept of a net flow. (e.g.: carbon that comes out of a cow first went into a cow - via its food - which got apprx. all its carbon from the air)

Fertilisers and fuel did not come from the air. There are hundreds of millions of cows (and other livestock) that did not exist before. Landscapes have been sterilised to support them with a massive resulting freeing of previously captured carbon, or carbon trapped in a slow cycle. Methane from ruminants are a significant source of CO2 and are not easily recaptured, not to mention a potent greenhouse gas.

Carbon dioxide is captured from the air, by plants, and then eaten by cows. So you're saying that any greenhouse gas from cows is that which has been previously captured.

But you're missing the fact that some of the CO2 captured by the grass is farted by the cows as methane, CH4.

About 1% of the CO2 is released as CH4.

CH4 is about 25 times more potent as a greenhouse gas. It's one of the most potent greenhouse gases.

Luckily methane has a half life of 7 years in the atmosphere, so anything we do to reduce methane emissions is likely to be helpful.

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#77

Post by JBReefer »

mooreds wrote: post #36
xfactor973 wrote: post #32

I planted about 50 fruit trees and bushes when I moved into my new place. I also converted the electric to 100% renewable. Other than dumping my natural gas heater I'm not sure what's left that I can do to help reduce climate change.

What is your commute like? What politicians do you support? Those are both ways you can affect climate change.

Driving -> biking and pushing for better electric-based transit are your two best ways to help the climate.

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#78

Post by blondie9x »

adventured wrote: post #17
AznHisoka wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're asking people to stop wanting money? The people who want to solve life threatening problems will do so and the people who want to make "trivial" apps to make lots of money will do so. Asking us to just do the former is pointless. Also what about people who aren't entrepreneurs and work at industries like finance, law, and first country problems? Shouldn't they be held under the same scrutiny? What's so spec…

You make an extremely good point. I had not considered that every time a person complains about duplication of apps, or developers that make trivial apps for money (instead of 'changing the world'), the same standard should be applied to the tens of millions of service and industrial jobs that are mostly clones of each other and could be considered trivial by the same standard. For example: we really need to do somet…

I'm saying when apps are written to duplicate what is already free. The comparison to laborers is fallacious.

I'm referring to innovators in computer science who say they innovate when they simply recreate. It's a waste of efforts

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#79

Post by downandout »

nothrabannosir wrote: post #72
mooreds wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your commute like? What politicians do you support? Those are both ways you can affect climate change.

I see a lot of down-vote worthy responses to OP, and more downvotes. But in this case, I honestly don't see it: why is this not a fair question? I mean, in a genuinely neutral sense; isn't he right?

>in a genuinely neutral sense

Asking if someone supports politicians that claim to be eco-conscious while raising campaign money, who are almost universally left-leaning, is far from "neutral". There are places on the Internet to espouse political support for either side. This, however, is not one of them.

Re: Climate-Related Death of Coral Around World Alarms Scientists

#80

Post by blondie9x »

fche wrote: post #42
banach wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop eating animal-based food. See http://www.cowspiracy.com/ for details.

Cowspiracy's points on GHG emission and water consumption are simply illiterate. They don't recognize the concept of a net flow. (e.g.: carbon that comes out of a cow first went into a cow - via its food - which got apprx. all its carbon from the air)

Biggest impact livestock has is on the forests leveled for grazing. Such as Amazon in Brazil mostly used for livestock when it was a good carbon store previously.
Post reply on HN