The emission scenarios were developed decades ago and are proving to be over-estimates. The author interprets that as outdated science which is a rather pessimistic view. I interpret it differently: Scientists make a spread of climate predictions and their potential consequences. Those listening mustered significant market/public/government pressure and ... it worked. We pushed the outcome towards the low end of the…
But the problem is that they are continuing to use the outdated models for current science.
The emission scenarios were developed decades ago and are proving to be over-estimates. The author interprets that as outdated science which is a rather pessimistic view. I interpret it differently: Scientists make a spread of climate predictions and their potential consequences. Those listening mustered significant market/public/government pressure and ... it worked. We pushed the outcome towards the low end of the…
Having consulted a graph [0] of coal production in the UK, it seems a difficult sell to argue that there have been any policy changes in the last century.
It seems likely oil will follow the same trajectory. We've been due to hit the global peak sometime soon, more oil has been consumed than discovered for a while now.
If people persist in using the stuff until it runs out, it is hard to see what the effect of all the pressure was.
The emission scenarios were developed decades ago and are proving to be over-estimates. The author interprets that as outdated science which is a rather pessimistic view. I interpret it differently: Scientists make a spread of climate predictions and their potential consequences. Those listening mustered significant market/public/government pressure and ... it worked. We pushed the outcome towards the low end of the…
What exactly was done because of pressure? More solar cells and wind mills? Have those even crossed the point where they produced more energy than what was used in their production yet? In my country, they are shutting down nuclear power plants, relying on coal instead. Electric cars are still a rarity, and global car use seems to be rising still. I find your line of reasoning maddening. While it is possible that pre…
What exactly was done because of pressure? More solar cells and wind mills? Have those even crossed the point where they produced more energy than what was used in their production yet? In my country, they are shutting down nuclear power plants, relying on coal instead. Electric cars are still a rarity, and global car use seems to be rising still. I find your line of reasoning maddening. While it is possible that pre…
Counter anecdote: South Australia had almost 100% of its energy from coal burning just a few years ago... Today, it's nearly entirely solar-powered: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-25/all-sa-power-from-sol... Another one: in Norway, most cars being sold right now are electric: https://www.voanews.com/europe/norway-says-more-50-new-cars-... These are huge local achievements, but it shows that at least in some part…
Worth pointing out with the Norwegian one as well that almost all of their electricity is renewable. So those cars aren’t just going from oil to coal but oil to renewables.
>It's not malicious, it's just a fact of how these things work While I agree it's not malicious, I'd say the reason it works this way is that there is a financial incentive to have it work this way.
It is not finance. There are a lot of motivations which are based on ego or prestige. Scholarship is unfortunately often based on competition - but the standards of winning are different from that of oil tycoons. Boiling everything down to finance will not lead to accurate understanding of how academia works.
> Boiling everything down to finance will not lead to accurate understanding of how academia works
Why not? Given that only people with the 'correct' views get tenure to begin with, it doesn't surprise me at all that while there is plenty of ego and prestige, I'd classify it as bickering among priests. Point remains, only people who are indoctrinated and interested in advancing the interests of the church get to be priests to begin with.
There's something quite like this in US law. If you are citing a case in a legal brief, you need to make sure it hasn't been overturned along the way, so you 'Shepardize' it. From Wikipedia [0]: Shepard's Citations is a citator used in United States legal research that provides a list of all the authorities citing a particular case, statute, or other legal authority. The verb Shepardizing refers to the process of con…
We're effectively bringing shepardizing to science at scite (scite.ai). Here's a piece I published on the topic recently: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S259023852...
Hi! I checked out scite and really like the product- however, I can't seem to find relevant papers in my field (ML&AI), ie., I searched for the batchnorm paper, which there has been a lot of 'reevaluation' of- but it's not available.
I suppose at this point you don't have access to (some of) the big AI journals/conferences. Is this something on the horizon?
The emission scenarios were developed decades ago and are proving to be over-estimates. The author interprets that as outdated science which is a rather pessimistic view. I interpret it differently: Scientists make a spread of climate predictions and their potential consequences. Those listening mustered significant market/public/government pressure and ... it worked. We pushed the outcome towards the low end of the…
Having consulted a graph [0] of coal production in the UK, it seems a difficult sell to argue that there have been any policy changes in the last century. It seems likely oil will follow the same trajectory. We've been due to hit the global peak sometime soon, more oil has been consumed than discovered for a while now. If people persist in using the stuff until it runs out, it is hard to see what the effect of all th…
"Discovered" is a pretty flexible term. Geologists will only go out to look for the stuff if there's an expected return on extracting it. Similarly, "reserves" means stuff that (a) we know about and (b) that we think can be extracted economically. In effect, it's tautological to say that we'll "use the stuff until it runs out", because at whatever point we stop using it there'll still be some left that's just slightly too difficult to extract (given, hopefully, alternatives and taxes) for it to be worth it.