5 ms·

The worst predicted impacts of climate change are starting to happen (2015)

112 points by kawera 10y ago

adwhit 10y ago
I will upvote any HN article about climate change! I really want the tech community to start seriously panicking about this stuff. They after all have the skills and the influence to do something about it.
- Namrog84 10y ago
  1. Do you think that the efforts should be to reverse it. How much of this is tech vs political? 2. How to handle it when it arrives? 3. how to survive the after effects of an apocalyptic scenario?
  - eli_gottlieb 10y ago
    >Do you think that the efforts should be to reverse it. Yes, that's our only realistic chance to restore a remotely healthy and diverse ecosystem on this planet.
- madaxe_again 10y ago
  Likewise, but doing anything about it requires regulation and governmental intervention, which is something the tech community are generally dead against - there's a big intersection between technocratic thinking and libertarian/minimal government thinking. Most argue that "the market" will solve this. I'd argue that it got us here, as we continue to treat the habitability of earth as an externality, with no economic cost.
  - tpeo 10y ago
    I find it hard do believe that most would argue that the market will solve this issue, unless they're deeply ignorant of mainstream economics. Pollution is a classic example of a negative economic externality [0], and markets generally don't "fix" externalities unless: - merger costs are low enough that the people afflicted can buy out the polluter; - transaction costs are low enough that they can reach a mutual beneficial bargain (as per Coase)[1]; Both of which are impracticable. I won't even talk about the first solution. As for the second one, Global warming affects everyone across legal boundaries, so bargains are off the table. But I don't think the third solution is currently applicable either, which is the government stepping in. Who would step in? There isn't a world government yet, and the interests of national governments are much more likely to align with the polluters located in their territory than with with an Indian peasant whose crops just died because of the heat. Even if several governments committed to an agreement, it could be profitable to deviate from the agreement by enforcing and requiring lower environmental protection standards in order to attract investments from polluting industries. It's kind of a hard problem. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem
    - Sideloader 10y ago
      You may find it hard to believe but the market "taking care of itself" is at the core of the neo-liberal ideology peddled by the powers that be from Obama, the Clintons, the EU, IMF, World Bank, ECB etc. They don't care if it destroys the planet or drives people into poverty. As long as it works for them, it's all good. Technology will fix it so no need to worry.
  - Sideloader 10y ago
    Well said. Letting corporations and financial institutions regulate themselves has been disastrous on so many levels. But so long as they are protected from the effects of climate change the SV libertarian "tech delusionists" will keep their heads buried firmly in the sand.
Namrog84 10y ago
I'm always unsure how to react to claims of 10 foot rise in sea level in 40 years. Considering how many cities and regions are within 10' of sea level. I understand how awesomely devastating to the world this would be. Should we all be freaking out? Does like every single person need to start taking it seriously? Are the powers at be doing enough to hopefully curb it enough? Is there anything we can really do aside from vote for the right people? Or are we utterly screwed and likely millions+ will die within by end of this century for our species negligence?
- madaxe_again 10y ago
  In my more tinfoil moments, I do wonder how much of the terroristic furore is a smokescreen to distract populations from a harrowing truth, and to allow the implementation of more authoritarian systems of control, which will be needed if climate change displaces billions of people.
- adrianN 10y ago
  We are pretty much screwed. Anything we do now will be too little, too late. If we really get our shit together, maybe we can limit warming to 2 degrees. To do so we need to completely stop producing GHGs. At current rates we have about 22 years. The rate is rising, not falling. http://www.trillionthtonne.org/ http://www.trillionthtonne.org/
- js8 10y ago
  > Should we all be freaking out? Does like every single person need to start taking it seriously? Are the powers at be doing enough to hopefully curb it enough? Is there anything we can really do aside from vote for the right people? No. Yes. No. Yes, trust the scientists, make this into a political issue, support carbon tax (Hansen's proposal). > Or are we utterly screwed and likely millions+ will die within by end of this century for our species negligence? I think best is to be pessimistic about the default outcome but optimistic about our ability to prevent it. P.S. Article is from mid-2015, and this year is no more sane so far.
- douche 10y ago
  I have to wonder if claims of extreme sea rise like that are reality-based or pure fear-mongering. From a simple geometric analysis, it seems unlikely that the most outlandish claims could be correct - it takes an unbelievable fuck-ton of ice melting to raise sea levels even a little. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/worried-about-floods-due-to-rising-sea-level-forget-it-not-happening.php http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/worried-about-...
julius 10y ago
In Star Trek there is a holiday planet, with climate controls. Change the weather and the temperature with the press of a button. Today people are scared of the planet getting too hot. People are even more scared of the planet getting too cold. People have serious trouble, when it is not sunny enough or rainy enough, to support food production. Seems like this would be more useful right now, than the warp drive...
mpitt 10y ago
(2015)
touristtam 10y ago
no wonder when you have people that needs a Brian Cox to remind them they know nothing. (see http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4499754.htm http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4499754.htm)
acconrad 10y ago
Not that it makes the article less important or relevant, but it came out in 2015 and should be noted in the title.
helthanatos 10y ago
>If emissions aren't cut, "We conclude that multi-meter sea-level rise would become practically unavoidable. If this article isn't full of fear-mongering and assumptions...

112 points by kawera 10y ago

I will upvote any HN article about climate change! I really want the tech community to start seriously panicking about this stuff. They after all have the skills and the influence to do something about it.

Namrog84 10y ago
1. Do you think that the efforts should be to reverse it. How much of this is tech vs political? 2. How to handle it when it arrives? 3. how to survive the after effects of an apocalyptic scenario?
- eli_gottlieb 10y ago
  >Do you think that the efforts should be to reverse it. Yes, that's our only realistic chance to restore a remotely healthy and diverse ecosystem on this planet.
madaxe_again 10y ago
Likewise, but doing anything about it requires regulation and governmental intervention, which is something the tech community are generally dead against - there's a big intersection between technocratic thinking and libertarian/minimal government thinking. Most argue that "the market" will solve this. I'd argue that it got us here, as we continue to treat the habitability of earth as an externality, with no economic cost.
- tpeo 10y ago
  I find it hard do believe that most would argue that the market will solve this issue, unless they're deeply ignorant of mainstream economics. Pollution is a classic example of a negative economic externality [0], and markets generally don't "fix" externalities unless: - merger costs are low enough that the people afflicted can buy out the polluter; - transaction costs are low enough that they can reach a mutual beneficial bargain (as per Coase)[1]; Both of which are impracticable. I won't even talk about the first solution. As for the second one, Global warming affects everyone across legal boundaries, so bargains are off the table. But I don't think the third solution is currently applicable either, which is the government stepping in. Who would step in? There isn't a world government yet, and the interests of national governments are much more likely to align with the polluters located in their territory than with with an Indian peasant whose crops just died because of the heat. Even if several governments committed to an agreement, it could be profitable to deviate from the agreement by enforcing and requiring lower environmental protection standards in order to attract investments from polluting industries. It's kind of a hard problem. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coase_theorem
  - Sideloader 10y ago
    You may find it hard to believe but the market "taking care of itself" is at the core of the neo-liberal ideology peddled by the powers that be from Obama, the Clintons, the EU, IMF, World Bank, ECB etc. They don't care if it destroys the planet or drives people into poverty. As long as it works for them, it's all good. Technology will fix it so no need to worry.
- Sideloader 10y ago
  Well said. Letting corporations and financial institutions regulate themselves has been disastrous on so many levels. But so long as they are protected from the effects of climate change the SV libertarian "tech delusionists" will keep their heads buried firmly in the sand.

Namrog84 10y ago

I'm always unsure how to react to claims of 10 foot rise in sea level in 40 years. Considering how many cities and regions are within 10' of sea level. I understand how awesomely devastating to the world this would be. Should we all be freaking out? Does like every single person need to start taking it seriously? Are the powers at be doing enough to hopefully curb it enough? Is there anything we can really do aside from vote for the right people? Or are we utterly screwed and likely millions+ will die within by end of this century for our species negligence?

madaxe_again 10y ago
In my more tinfoil moments, I do wonder how much of the terroristic furore is a smokescreen to distract populations from a harrowing truth, and to allow the implementation of more authoritarian systems of control, which will be needed if climate change displaces billions of people.
adrianN 10y ago
We are pretty much screwed. Anything we do now will be too little, too late. If we really get our shit together, maybe we can limit warming to 2 degrees. To do so we need to completely stop producing GHGs. At current rates we have about 22 years. The rate is rising, not falling. http://www.trillionthtonne.org/ http://www.trillionthtonne.org/
js8 10y ago
> Should we all be freaking out? Does like every single person need to start taking it seriously? Are the powers at be doing enough to hopefully curb it enough? Is there anything we can really do aside from vote for the right people? No. Yes. No. Yes, trust the scientists, make this into a political issue, support carbon tax (Hansen's proposal). > Or are we utterly screwed and likely millions+ will die within by end of this century for our species negligence? I think best is to be pessimistic about the default outcome but optimistic about our ability to prevent it. P.S. Article is from mid-2015, and this year is no more sane so far.
douche 10y ago
I have to wonder if claims of extreme sea rise like that are reality-based or pure fear-mongering. From a simple geometric analysis, it seems unlikely that the most outlandish claims could be correct - it takes an unbelievable fuck-ton of ice melting to raise sea levels even a little. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/worried-about-floods-due-to-rising-sea-level-forget-it-not-happening.php http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/05/worried-about-...

julius 10y ago

In Star Trek there is a holiday planet, with climate controls. Change the weather and the temperature with the press of a button. Today people are scared of the planet getting too hot. People are even more scared of the planet getting too cold. People have serious trouble, when it is not sunny enough or rainy enough, to support food production. Seems like this would be more useful right now, than the warp drive...

mpitt 10y ago

(2015)

touristtam 10y ago

no wonder when you have people that needs a Brian Cox to remind them they know nothing. (see http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4499754.htm http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4499754.htm)

acconrad 10y ago

Not that it makes the article less important or relevant, but it came out in 2015 and should be noted in the title.

helthanatos 10y ago

>If emissions aren't cut, "We conclude that multi-meter sea-level rise would become practically unavoidable. If this article isn't full of fear-mongering and assumptions...