3 ms·

Ignoring the effects on natural biodiversity, I think letting it happen would actually be less of an issue for humans. It's not that expensive to build seawalls

Ignoring the effects on natural biodiversity, I think letting it happen would actually be less of an issue for humans. It's not that expensive to build seawalls around coastal cities. Crops will be grown further north and crops will grow more easily in higher CO2. On the other hand, stopping it would basically involve a war on developing countries to forcibly prevent them from developing further. Most developed countries have already leveled off their CO2 emissions or are headed downward. Increased CO2 will harm the developing world more than anywhere else, but those places are also the least interested in putting in the effort to stop the effects.

TeMPOraL 5y ago
> stopping it would basically involve a war on developing countries to forcibly prevent them from developing further. Why not instead just give them the developed tech and the expertise? Instead of sending tanks, send wind turbines and photovoltaics and release all the IP on them. Instead of suppressing development, let them leapfrog the carbon-intensive technologies.
- l33t2328 5y ago
  This is a naive solution. What IP is being held back?
  - TeMPOraL 5y ago
    Why is it naive? Why is going to war better? The way I see it, not doing it is naive, and borders on trying to make the problem worse on purpose. > What IP is being held back? Design specs, software specs, for all the things between "sunlight" and "DC electricity", as well as tools to manufacture those things, and the tools to manufacture those... My point is that we have to give them the technology without making them dependent on the west for maintenance. Short-term, they need to know how to operate, fix, and jury-rig it themselves. Mid-term, they need to know how to manufacture it out of components bought on the global market. Long-term, they need to be able to manufacture them themselves from scratch. To get there, they cannot be hamstrung by IP licensing making them pay through the roof and/or ask for permission to do anything with green technologies.
ls612 5y ago
That's kinda the conclusion I've come to as well. In the very long term (hundreds of years from now) abundant nuclear or fusion power would allow for control of the level of CO2 in the atmosphere through carbon capture so all of the horrific doomsday scenarios of climate change are unlikely to happen to our great great great great great grandchildren. The issue will be mitigating the effects throughout the 21st century, and this will certainly cost a lot of money.

TeMPOraL 5y ago

> stopping it would basically involve a war on developing countries to forcibly prevent them from developing further. Why not instead just give them the developed tech and the expertise? Instead of sending tanks, send wind turbines and photovoltaics and release all the IP on them. Instead of suppressing development, let them leapfrog the carbon-intensive technologies.

l33t2328 5y ago
This is a naive solution. What IP is being held back?
- TeMPOraL 5y ago
  Why is it naive? Why is going to war better? The way I see it, not doing it is naive, and borders on trying to make the problem worse on purpose. > What IP is being held back? Design specs, software specs, for all the things between "sunlight" and "DC electricity", as well as tools to manufacture those things, and the tools to manufacture those... My point is that we have to give them the technology without making them dependent on the west for maintenance. Short-term, they need to know how to operate, fix, and jury-rig it themselves. Mid-term, they need to know how to manufacture it out of components bought on the global market. Long-term, they need to be able to manufacture them themselves from scratch. To get there, they cannot be hamstrung by IP licensing making them pay through the roof and/or ask for permission to do anything with green technologies.

ls612 5y ago

That's kinda the conclusion I've come to as well. In the very long term (hundreds of years from now) abundant nuclear or fusion power would allow for control of the level of CO2 in the atmosphere through carbon capture so all of the horrific doomsday scenarios of climate change are unlikely to happen to our great great great great great grandchildren. The issue will be mitigating the effects throughout the 21st century, and this will certainly cost a lot of money.