3 ms·

> Doing all those things is possible Renewables make up almost 0% of the total energy used by the world. Getting rid of fossil fuels or the fossil fuel industr

> Doing all those things is possible Renewables make up almost 0% of the total energy used by the world. Getting rid of fossil fuels or the fossil fuel industry is simply not possible. This is basic economics and physics. It's science. > in fact it's happening even without subsidies in many places Name one place where subsidies didn't prop up renewables. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/05/home-solar-panel-installations-fall-by-94-as-subsidies-cut https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/05/home-sol... https://ieefa.org/subsidy-cuts-result-in-sharp-drop-in-u-k-residential-solar-installations/ https://ieefa.org/subsidy-cuts-result-in-sharp-drop-in-u-k-r... The green energy industry itself admits it needs subsidies to exist hence why they lobby for more subsidies. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2015/09/01/solar-industry-admits-green-energy-only-exists-thanks-to-government-subsidies/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorfman/2015/09/01/solar... > Europe is already on IPCC 2C targets, and it's clearly not starving, its economy is fine. That's because Europe's fossil fuel use hasn't dropped. It has actually increased. Not only that, europe is building or trying to build pipelines from russia and the middle east to meet their energy needs. What do you the instability in syria was about? What do you think the geopolitical skirmish with russia is about? Pipelines and fossil fuels. Europe wants more of it, not less. > It really feels like a failure of science, technology and engineering community. We're failing at communicating. No. The communication is fine if you actually read and understand the science, technology and engineering. If you get your information from fearmongering newspapers, cable news or social media, then you have a real problem. While you worry about the end of the world, the science/tech/engineering community is planning future research into the 30s, 40s, etc. Space flight into the 30s, 40s. Mega construction projects in the 30s, 40s, etc - some of which will last decades. Surely if the world was going to end, these highly intelligent people wouldn't be wasting time and resources on such projects. I don't want to add to your anxiety, but the indian subcontinent, ASEAN, middle east, south america and africa are going to industrialize heavily in the coming decades. Conservatively, they make up about 40% of the world's population. So fossil fuel use is going to go up in the coming decades. So economics, science and reality says that fossil fuel use is going to increase. So if you are really sincere in what you say, then ask yourself, what is all the climate change rhetoric really about?

darkmighty 7y ago
> While you worry about the end of the world, the science/tech/engineering community is planning future research into the 30s, 40s, etc. Space flight into the 30s, 40s. Mega construction projects in the 30s, 40s, etc - some of which will last decades. Surely if the world was going to end, these highly intelligent people wouldn't be wasting time and resources on such projects. I am part of the science/engineering community. I also know oceanographers (personally), a handful of climate scientists (indirectly), several biologists from several fields, physicists, and more. People usually leave this stuff to specialists -- a physicist usually won't delve deep into climate science. Everyone I know that is informed (i.e. that doesn't say "I haven't looked at the climate data and projections") is deeply worried, and the oceanographer and climate scientists I know are the least hopeful (which should be worrying). Engineers generally just assume it's going to be fine for practical purposes -- I know a handful of civil engineers and electrical engineers working on large projects. The electrical engineer is informed on climate change and doesn't know how it will impact the project long term. Just look at the data. It's the ethical thing to do, at least I believe. If you don't, we're both wasting our times. Where to start? I recommend simply reading the wikipedia article in its entirety: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming paying special attention to this section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#Mitigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#Mitigation Look at the emission pathway -- it demands massive, immediate action. Also read this: https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_w... again pay attention to page 11: https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_w... again the emission targets. You can see if emissions keep increasing, i.e. pathways RCP6.0 and RCP8.5 are unlikely to keep warming under 3C (see table on page 13) -- likely to go to 4-5C of warming. Finally, you can see some of the effects here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_global_warming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_global_warming (note that no emission reduction, i.e. RCP>6.0, >3C warming isn't given much attention, given it's quite apocalyptic) and also here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_and_ecosystems#Forests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_and_ecosystems#... It's anyone's guess what would happen under this scenario, almost certainly mass extinction on ocean and land, the tropics become literally almost uninhabitable, effects on civilization anyone's guess in the range of catastrophe to collapse (imagine all of India and large parts of China trying to migrate).

darkmighty 7y ago

> While you worry about the end of the world, the science/tech/engineering community is planning future research into the 30s, 40s, etc. Space flight into the 30s, 40s. Mega construction projects in the 30s, 40s, etc - some of which will last decades. Surely if the world was going to end, these highly intelligent people wouldn't be wasting time and resources on such projects. I am part of the science/engineering community. I also know oceanographers (personally), a handful of climate scientists (indirectly), several biologists from several fields, physicists, and more. People usually leave this stuff to specialists -- a physicist usually won't delve deep into climate science. Everyone I know that is informed (i.e. that doesn't say "I haven't looked at the climate data and projections") is deeply worried, and the oceanographer and climate scientists I know are the least hopeful (which should be worrying). Engineers generally just assume it's going to be fine for practical purposes -- I know a handful of civil engineers and electrical engineers working on large projects. The electrical engineer is informed on climate change and doesn't know how it will impact the project long term. Just look at the data. It's the ethical thing to do, at least I believe. If you don't, we're both wasting our times. Where to start? I recommend simply reading the wikipedia article in its entirety: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming paying special attention to this section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#Mitigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming#Mitigation Look at the emission pathway -- it demands massive, immediate action. Also read this: https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_w... again pay attention to page 11: https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf https://archive.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg3/ipcc_w... again the emission targets. You can see if emissions keep increasing, i.e. pathways RCP6.0 and RCP8.5 are unlikely to keep warming under 3C (see table on page 13) -- likely to go to 4-5C of warming. Finally, you can see some of the effects here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_global_warming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_global_warming (note that no emission reduction, i.e. RCP>6.0, >3C warming isn't given much attention, given it's quite apocalyptic) and also here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_and_ecosystems#Forests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_and_ecosystems#... It's anyone's guess what would happen under this scenario, almost certainly mass extinction on ocean and land, the tropics become literally almost uninhabitable, effects on civilization anyone's guess in the range of catastrophe to collapse (imagine all of India and large parts of China trying to migrate).