5 ms·

6 billion people burning coal to keep their refrigerators running is not what I would call defused.

by ouid 9y ago

LifeLiverTransp 9y ago
Not mentioned besides the ecological footprint- there is with high density, a high chance for infectious disease to wipe out great parts of this humanity. Another aspect is, that liberal society is only kept as "guest" for bribes- as long as capitalism delivers continously improvements and sedates the population with trinkets- it is accepted- the moment that wanes, anti-liberal sentiments come back with full force from all sides. Thus interesting at the moment is not what great archievments the west accomplishes, but wether science, free debate and education can exist on in decaying societs like North Korea (extreme end) or Turkey/ Russia (at the start). Can a scientist work in a country in the middle east or mexico. If that is the "default" state of humanity, that is where our interest should be. There will be no city on mars, but there might be a secret society, doing fusion research in a slum filled with racists and relgious fanatic luddites - condemning us as the decadent golden past.
csallen 9y ago
And what are the consequences of that? I would guess significantly milder than the predictions of mass starvation that we managed to avert.
- Leader2light 9y ago
  Nobody knows, the destruction of the entire planet most likely. The earth is dying, you can see it everywhere you look if you open your eyes.
  - guskel 9y ago
    Agreed. If the bomb has been defused then it's only because it has already gone off.
  - stale2002 9y ago
    The scientists do indeed know. The scientific consensus is that sea levels will rise by a meter or 2 over the next 200 years, and cause damages measured in the couple trillions of dollars. This is all laid out in the IPCC report. Thats a lower cost than an Iraq war. That is the scientific consensus of the IPCC, which is the official authority on climate change. And the scientific consensus is that the world is definitely not going to end, nor is it even going to come close. Listen to the science and the scientific consensus!
    - telchar 9y ago
      You're taking the mean consensus prediction as gospel. There is a smaller but still very much possible chance of much more catastrophic consequences than that. It would be irresponsible for the IPCC to present only the most dire predictions, but I think it's also unwise for us to ignore them.
  - irrational 9y ago
    The earth isn't dying. It may become uninhabitable for humans, but that is quite different than the earth being dead.
    - honorarydarwina 9y ago
      Read between the lines. Nobody is that dumb to literally say that the earth is dying.
  - igravious 9y ago
    > Nobody knows, the destruction of the entire planet most likely. Entire planet? False. > The earth is dying, you can see it everywhere you look if you open your eyes. All I see when I "open my eyes" is people with your disposition making alarmist predictions based on either faulty reasoning, and/or ignorance, and/or out of fear. How is how you and other extreme pessimists like you behave not equivalent to yelling 'fire!' in a crowded theatre? If the Earth is our crowded theatre then you're being socially irresponsible with your doom and gloom scenarios, and the Earth is humanity's crowded theatre. My religious father used to predict the end of times, the end of the world as we know it, every few years. When the date came and went rather than revise his beliefs he'd move the date forward a couple of years. That is bonkers. Belief and identity are humanity's worst enemy: not birth-rates, not nukes, not CO2 emissions, not A(G)I, not any of these things but our own crappy cognitive mechanisms.
- craftyguy 9y ago
  The consequences could include things like forced mass migrations, wars over water rights, and an increase in territorial disputes among nations as land becomes more scarce than it already is. In addition, the byproducts of coal burning cause cancers and death, regardless of whether the previous stuff I mentioned actually happens (hint: it's already starting to happen).
woolvalley 9y ago
Don't worry, it will be solar panels soon enough. Simply because it will be cheaper.
zanny 9y ago
If solar can manage to maintain even 10% of its performance growth per annum it has had in the last decade coal will be obsolete completely everywhere except in the most geographically extreme environments by 2030. People are very much underestimating the momentum of something cheap and with minimal side effects can have on an economic status quo. Or more particularly, is already having - solar as a percentage of global energy production doubled from 1 to 2% in the last three years, and if we keep adding almost 100GW of solar per year (and cheaper / more efficient panels just accelerate that adoption, and nothing can really slow it down unless the prices regress) the planet will be 10% solar by 2025. And thats the pessimistic status quo figure.
- freebear 9y ago
  https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610457/at-this-rate-its-going-to-take-nearly-400-years-to-transform-the-energy-system/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610457/at-this-rate-its-g...
  - stale2002 9y ago
    This article is incorrectly using the current rate of growth of solar, in CONSTANT terms, and not in percentage terms. Solar panel is growing in percentage rates, as it has been doing so for the last 3 decades. IE, it increases by X% every year. When something doubles every Y years, it quickly overwhelms everything. Today we are adding 100 gigawatts of solar per year. And in 2-3 years that rate of change is now 200 gigawatts ADDED every year, and then its 400 gigawatts per year.
    - crowbahr 9y ago
      The original author shouldn't have done linear calculations but exponential. That said: the longer that it takes to get that exponential; the more there is in the atmosphere. I wonder how those curves compare to linear and where break even is...
    - freebear 9y ago
      Look at the chart, the numbers are correct, everything grows (in large amounts). We are about to double the amount of fossil fueled cars in the next 10-15 years. It will not matter how much solar we install if we keep increasing our fossil burning (as we will). In fact, we use other sources of energy than oil to extract and refine the oil. We are terribly addicted to oil. One could say we sold our mother (Earth) for a shot of hubris. It took us to the Moon and the stars. It gives and it takes lives, one could think we are dealing with the Devil. For each day we do not decrease our fossil fuel use nothing will make a difference, the fact is that the Earth is becoming a worse place for each of those days. Our culture is not only addicted to oil, there is a bigger picture. Our culture is dependent on growth, hence the addiction to energy, all kinds of energy. We will go on this way, no matter what, for as long as we can.

6 billion people burning coal to keep their refrigerators running is not what I would call defused.

by ouid 9y ago

6 billion people burning coal to keep their refrigerators running is not what I would call defused.

Not mentioned besides the ecological footprint- there is with high density, a high chance for infectious disease to wipe out great parts of this humanity. Another aspect is, that liberal society is only kept as "guest" for bribes- as long as capitalism delivers continously improvements and sedates the population with trinkets- it is accepted- the moment that wanes, anti-liberal sentiments come back with full force from all sides. Thus interesting at the moment is not what great archievments the west accomplishes, but wether science, free debate and education can exist on in decaying societs like North Korea (extreme end) or Turkey/ Russia (at the start). Can a scientist work in a country in the middle east or mexico. If that is the "default" state of humanity, that is where our interest should be. There will be no city on mars, but there might be a secret society, doing fusion research in a slum filled with racists and relgious fanatic luddites - condemning us as the decadent golden past.

csallen 9y ago

And what are the consequences of that? I would guess significantly milder than the predictions of mass starvation that we managed to avert.

Leader2light 9y ago
Nobody knows, the destruction of the entire planet most likely. The earth is dying, you can see it everywhere you look if you open your eyes.
- guskel 9y ago
  Agreed. If the bomb has been defused then it's only because it has already gone off.
- stale2002 9y ago
  The scientists do indeed know. The scientific consensus is that sea levels will rise by a meter or 2 over the next 200 years, and cause damages measured in the couple trillions of dollars. This is all laid out in the IPCC report. Thats a lower cost than an Iraq war. That is the scientific consensus of the IPCC, which is the official authority on climate change. And the scientific consensus is that the world is definitely not going to end, nor is it even going to come close. Listen to the science and the scientific consensus!
  - telchar 9y ago
    You're taking the mean consensus prediction as gospel. There is a smaller but still very much possible chance of much more catastrophic consequences than that. It would be irresponsible for the IPCC to present only the most dire predictions, but I think it's also unwise for us to ignore them.
- irrational 9y ago
  The earth isn't dying. It may become uninhabitable for humans, but that is quite different than the earth being dead.
  - honorarydarwina 9y ago
    Read between the lines. Nobody is that dumb to literally say that the earth is dying.
- igravious 9y ago
  > Nobody knows, the destruction of the entire planet most likely. Entire planet? False. > The earth is dying, you can see it everywhere you look if you open your eyes. All I see when I "open my eyes" is people with your disposition making alarmist predictions based on either faulty reasoning, and/or ignorance, and/or out of fear. How is how you and other extreme pessimists like you behave not equivalent to yelling 'fire!' in a crowded theatre? If the Earth is our crowded theatre then you're being socially irresponsible with your doom and gloom scenarios, and the Earth is humanity's crowded theatre. My religious father used to predict the end of times, the end of the world as we know it, every few years. When the date came and went rather than revise his beliefs he'd move the date forward a couple of years. That is bonkers. Belief and identity are humanity's worst enemy: not birth-rates, not nukes, not CO2 emissions, not A(G)I, not any of these things but our own crappy cognitive mechanisms.
craftyguy 9y ago
The consequences could include things like forced mass migrations, wars over water rights, and an increase in territorial disputes among nations as land becomes more scarce than it already is. In addition, the byproducts of coal burning cause cancers and death, regardless of whether the previous stuff I mentioned actually happens (hint: it's already starting to happen).

woolvalley 9y ago

Don't worry, it will be solar panels soon enough. Simply because it will be cheaper.

zanny 9y ago

If solar can manage to maintain even 10% of its performance growth per annum it has had in the last decade coal will be obsolete completely everywhere except in the most geographically extreme environments by 2030. People are very much underestimating the momentum of something cheap and with minimal side effects can have on an economic status quo. Or more particularly, is already having - solar as a percentage of global energy production doubled from 1 to 2% in the last three years, and if we keep adding almost 100GW of solar per year (and cheaper / more efficient panels just accelerate that adoption, and nothing can really slow it down unless the prices regress) the planet will be 10% solar by 2025. And thats the pessimistic status quo figure.

freebear 9y ago
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610457/at-this-rate-its-going-to-take-nearly-400-years-to-transform-the-energy-system/ https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610457/at-this-rate-its-g...
- stale2002 9y ago
  This article is incorrectly using the current rate of growth of solar, in CONSTANT terms, and not in percentage terms. Solar panel is growing in percentage rates, as it has been doing so for the last 3 decades. IE, it increases by X% every year. When something doubles every Y years, it quickly overwhelms everything. Today we are adding 100 gigawatts of solar per year. And in 2-3 years that rate of change is now 200 gigawatts ADDED every year, and then its 400 gigawatts per year.
  - crowbahr 9y ago
    The original author shouldn't have done linear calculations but exponential. That said: the longer that it takes to get that exponential; the more there is in the atmosphere. I wonder how those curves compare to linear and where break even is...
  - freebear 9y ago
    Look at the chart, the numbers are correct, everything grows (in large amounts). We are about to double the amount of fossil fueled cars in the next 10-15 years. It will not matter how much solar we install if we keep increasing our fossil burning (as we will). In fact, we use other sources of energy than oil to extract and refine the oil. We are terribly addicted to oil. One could say we sold our mother (Earth) for a shot of hubris. It took us to the Moon and the stars. It gives and it takes lives, one could think we are dealing with the Devil. For each day we do not decrease our fossil fuel use nothing will make a difference, the fact is that the Earth is becoming a worse place for each of those days. Our culture is not only addicted to oil, there is a bigger picture. Our culture is dependent on growth, hence the addiction to energy, all kinds of energy. We will go on this way, no matter what, for as long as we can.