4 ms·

There was a movie about that. What was it? Oh yes, "The Andromeda Strain". Michael Crichton would have a better legacy if he had not turned to global climate d

by ncmncm 5y ago

There was a movie about that. What was it? Oh yes, "The Andromeda Strain". Michael Crichton would have a better legacy if he had not turned to global climate disruption denialism in his final years. The problem with microorganisms eating all the waste plastic is that then the carbon in it is no longer sequestered.

jjtheblunt 5y ago
> Michael Crichton would have a better legacy if he had not turned to global climate disruption denialism in his final years. Wait. I read his stuff and he carefully didn't deny it, just pointed out that it's super important to have way more data than pop cultural opinions were being echo-chamber based on.
- qvrjuec 5y ago
  He didn't outright deny it, but he was not acting in good faith when rallying against the mainstream perspective. I remember seeing an example where he specifically made an argument using a projection model that wasn't accurate, conveniently ignoring the fact that that model was only 1 of 3 and another one of the 3 was almost spot on.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  That was his line. But (a) he was wrong, and (b) had the oncoming catastrophe been smaller than predicted, stalling action would still have been wrong. The massive build-out of wind and solar power generation has made energy radically cheaper than it has ever been. Had we started sooner, we would not only have a much smaller crisis now, but we would have spent overwhelmingly less on coal and oil, and polluted correspondingly less. Even without the looming crisis, we would be much better off, and Saudi Arabia and Russia would not now command nearly so much influence in the world. Exactly to the degree that Crichton personally stalled action, blood is on his hands.
  - hulitu 5y ago
    "The massive build-out of wind and solar power generation has made energy radically cheaper than it has ever been." As far as i know nuclear power and to some extent hydro power made the energy cheaper. Solar is expensive and it is not clear what its benefits are. Wind ...
    - ncmncm 5y ago
      Solar is by far the cheapest source of energy ever fielded, followed closely by wind. Nukes are among the most expensive still in common use. If you are hearing that nuke power is cheap, you are being lied to. Just now, nukes are about even with solar and wind backed with natural gas if, but only if, you ignore their capital cost. But solar and wind costs are still falling. Once renewables have been built out enough to be able to displace other energy sources, they will need to be supplemented with storage. (Before, there is no point: charging storage from fossil fuels would be counterproductive.) Storage cost is on the same exponential free-fall we saw for solar and wind, so that when time comes to start building out storage, renewables + storage will be cheaper than solar alone, today.
CamperBob2 5y ago
Depolymerization was only an incidental side effect in The Andromeda Strain. I'd say Pedler & Davis's near-contemporary publication Mutant 59: The Plastic Eaters would be the seminal work in the field.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  But, without a movie.
  - CamperBob2 5y ago
    Anyone who watched the Andromeda Strain movie but didn't read the book (preferably at an impressionable age) really missed out on some awesome sauce.
    - ncmncm 5y ago
      Of course I read it, back when. But people don't read books anymore, do they? Favorite recent book lately is by Don Eyles, "Sunburst and Luminary", about developing the Apollo lunar landing software. I bought it off the website below, which delivered quickly without fuss. http://sunburstandluminary.com/ http://sunburstandluminary.com/ I take the opportunity to remember Hal Laning (d. 2012), the person who programmed the executive task management "OS" on the Apollo Guidance Computer, that saved Apollo 11. He gets too little recognition. He created, too, credibly the first compiler ever.
      - CamperBob2 5y ago
        Eyles is sitting on my desk, up next in the queue. Good to hear it's worthwhile.
- Turing_Machine 5y ago
  That book has held up surprisingly well. It's out on Kindle.
- leobg 5y ago
  It’s a great read! Well researched. Read it just last week after a recommendation here on HN.
mensetmanusman 5y ago
“ The problem with microorganisms eating all the waste plastic is that then the carbon in it is no longer sequestered.” This ignores secondary effects like the fact that less plastics might allow more life which does sequester carbon.
- kolinko 5y ago
  How? Plastic trash takes a miniscule area on the world map - even if a rainforest would pop up on every trash place, it would not offset the emissions from the bacteria that eat it. Also, the optimistic scenario would be that such bacteria would release co2. If instead they released methane, we would be doomed.
  - mensetmanusman 5y ago
    Microplastics (in cosmetics for example) seemto harm ocean life, the more ocean life the better :)

by ncmncm 5y ago

jjtheblunt 5y ago

> Michael Crichton would have a better legacy if he had not turned to global climate disruption denialism in his final years. Wait. I read his stuff and he carefully didn't deny it, just pointed out that it's super important to have way more data than pop cultural opinions were being echo-chamber based on.

qvrjuec 5y ago
He didn't outright deny it, but he was not acting in good faith when rallying against the mainstream perspective. I remember seeing an example where he specifically made an argument using a projection model that wasn't accurate, conveniently ignoring the fact that that model was only 1 of 3 and another one of the 3 was almost spot on.
ncmncm 5y ago
That was his line. But (a) he was wrong, and (b) had the oncoming catastrophe been smaller than predicted, stalling action would still have been wrong. The massive build-out of wind and solar power generation has made energy radically cheaper than it has ever been. Had we started sooner, we would not only have a much smaller crisis now, but we would have spent overwhelmingly less on coal and oil, and polluted correspondingly less. Even without the looming crisis, we would be much better off, and Saudi Arabia and Russia would not now command nearly so much influence in the world. Exactly to the degree that Crichton personally stalled action, blood is on his hands.
- hulitu 5y ago
  "The massive build-out of wind and solar power generation has made energy radically cheaper than it has ever been." As far as i know nuclear power and to some extent hydro power made the energy cheaper. Solar is expensive and it is not clear what its benefits are. Wind ...
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    Solar is by far the cheapest source of energy ever fielded, followed closely by wind. Nukes are among the most expensive still in common use. If you are hearing that nuke power is cheap, you are being lied to. Just now, nukes are about even with solar and wind backed with natural gas if, but only if, you ignore their capital cost. But solar and wind costs are still falling. Once renewables have been built out enough to be able to displace other energy sources, they will need to be supplemented with storage. (Before, there is no point: charging storage from fossil fuels would be counterproductive.) Storage cost is on the same exponential free-fall we saw for solar and wind, so that when time comes to start building out storage, renewables + storage will be cheaper than solar alone, today.

CamperBob2 5y ago

Depolymerization was only an incidental side effect in The Andromeda Strain. I'd say Pedler & Davis's near-contemporary publication Mutant 59: The Plastic Eaters would be the seminal work in the field.

ncmncm 5y ago
But, without a movie.
- CamperBob2 5y ago
  Anyone who watched the Andromeda Strain movie but didn't read the book (preferably at an impressionable age) really missed out on some awesome sauce.
  - ncmncm 5y ago
    Of course I read it, back when. But people don't read books anymore, do they? Favorite recent book lately is by Don Eyles, "Sunburst and Luminary", about developing the Apollo lunar landing software. I bought it off the website below, which delivered quickly without fuss. http://sunburstandluminary.com/ http://sunburstandluminary.com/ I take the opportunity to remember Hal Laning (d. 2012), the person who programmed the executive task management "OS" on the Apollo Guidance Computer, that saved Apollo 11. He gets too little recognition. He created, too, credibly the first compiler ever.
    - CamperBob2 5y ago
      Eyles is sitting on my desk, up next in the queue. Good to hear it's worthwhile.
Turing_Machine 5y ago
That book has held up surprisingly well. It's out on Kindle.
leobg 5y ago
It’s a great read! Well researched. Read it just last week after a recommendation here on HN.

mensetmanusman 5y ago

“ The problem with microorganisms eating all the waste plastic is that then the carbon in it is no longer sequestered.” This ignores secondary effects like the fact that less plastics might allow more life which does sequester carbon.

kolinko 5y ago
How? Plastic trash takes a miniscule area on the world map - even if a rainforest would pop up on every trash place, it would not offset the emissions from the bacteria that eat it. Also, the optimistic scenario would be that such bacteria would release co2. If instead they released methane, we would be doomed.
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  Microplastics (in cosmetics for example) seemto harm ocean life, the more ocean life the better :)