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

Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

unenvironment.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 205 posts

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#91

Post by malka »

altacc wrote: post #26
LinuxBender wrote: post #6

Is there a chart that shows the progress each nation is making year over year to cut emissions?

The problem with country by country analysis is that people turn it into an excuse not to do anything. "Why should the US/EU do anything if China is just going to keep polluting." Countries should be focusing on what they can do themselves, as well as globally, and be leaders, not laggards.

except that it makes no sense in game theory.

The first state to do it will see its economy shrink, and it will be bought by other who do not.

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#92

Post by CodeSheikh »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #54

I think it should be somewhat obvious that it will be impossible for us to avoid the absolute worst of global warming. Humans simply don't have the capability to act in the coordinated, political way that is necessary. Somehow holding out hope that we'll all come to our senses and things will change is like holding out hope that we'll never have any wars again. It is just not compatible with human nature. I'd love it…

" where we have never had as much access to information, large swaths of the population don't even believe global warming is _real_"

I completely agree. In this age of broadband internet, social media where information is at your disposal, we are not matured enough to handle this, speaking from micro-evolutionary perspective. And where we can not digest/process/retain information, we conveniently convince overselves that it might not be real. Sadly, we are doomed.

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#93

Post by LinuxBender »

altacc wrote: post #26
LinuxBender wrote: post #6

Is there a chart that shows the progress each nation is making year over year to cut emissions?

The problem with country by country analysis is that people turn it into an excuse not to do anything. "Why should the US/EU do anything if China is just going to keep polluting." Countries should be focusing on what they can do themselves, as well as globally, and be leaders, not laggards.

You are probably right. I was thinking more along the lines that national leaders have an ego, so there could be a benefit to pointing out they are inadequate.

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#94

Post by Etheryte »

blondie9x wrote: post #74

To all, because governments have mostly failed us on quick action I created a climate pledge. It is open to feedback but I think starting with individual commitments and sustainable lifestyles will help us move society forward as a whole. Governments are not moving quickly enough on climate change with small incremental changes over time. However, people and organizations who champion these efforts can pressure gover…

For those wondering about the relative impact of each bullet, [1] is a quick starting point down a rabbit-hole that goes very deep.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wynes_Nicholas_CO2_emissi...

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#95

Post by mlyle »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #25
_qwfv wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that kwh will not be cost competitive with anything else on the spot market Maybe capitalism isn't the right model for energy? Or, if you are a die hard capitalist, maybe we aren't costing externalities correctly and we should get some folks in power who will ensure that the right options are also the cost competitive options?

Even assuming you're not a die hard capitalist, why champion an outdated energy technology when there are superior options. We aren't costing CO2 properly, but then we're also not costing decommissioning of nuclear generators or the waste disposal either.

We're not? https://www.nrc.gov/waste/decommissioning/finan-assur.html We also have a nuclear waste fund that previously received $750M in fees per year and sits at a balance of $44B, but that's been paused since there has been no effort to actually use the funds to dispose of waste.

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#96

Post by dang »

lugg wrote: post #73
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #54

I think it should be somewhat obvious that it will be impossible for us to avoid the absolute worst of global warming. Humans simply don't have the capability to act in the coordinated, political way that is necessary. Somehow holding out hope that we'll all come to our senses and things will change is like holding out hope that we'll never have any wars again. It is just not compatible with human nature. I'd love it…

Pull your head out your ass. You're the one sitting here on the internet claiming defeat. How many people have you told to cut back on consumption and fuel use this month? Yea. That's what I thought. Don't act like it's impossible to change behavior it's not. Smoking, drunk driving, domestic violence, racism, homophobia, and a bunch of other social issues have all been largely tackled the last few decades. In WW2 we…

We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines and ignoring our requests to stop.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#97

Post by larnmar »

avocado4 wrote: post #65
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #54

I think it should be somewhat obvious that it will be impossible for us to avoid the absolute worst of global warming. Humans simply don't have the capability to act in the coordinated, political way that is necessary. Somehow holding out hope that we'll all come to our senses and things will change is like holding out hope that we'll never have any wars again. It is just not compatible with human nature. I'd love it…

So how should an investor prepare today to the inevitable consequences of climate change?

Buy tundra. Buy up tons of land anywhere that’s currently too cold to be useful.

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#98

Post by raxxorrax »

astrodust wrote: post #4
verdverm wrote: post #2

Or create sequestration systems so the net is that? Or would the numbers change?

Trees. You're talking about trees.

Trees plant themselves quite well and the planet already got greener in the last decades. You would need bury them though before they decompose.

After the apocalypse a new civilization might find them again as coal and to start the cycle again.

Re: Cut global emissions by 7.6% per year for next decade to meet 1.5°C Paris target

#99

Post by malka »

rossdavidh wrote: post #56
altacc wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trees seem to be the solution of the day but, cynically, it seems to be a smokescreen in that some people are promoting this as the solution to climate change. No amount of tree planting is going to solve long term climate change, so it should be seen as one action amongst many. The focus on tree planting shifts the focus away from the action needed to reduce carbon emissions. It's a bit like building an extension to…

"No amount of tree planting..." is a strong statement. Not "we won't do enough", but "No amount..." will work? I find that hard to imagine. Is there a reason you say this?

I guess if we empty the oceans, and cover every inch of the earth with tree, it might work.
Post reply on HN