7 ms·
Wasting a lot dealing with a symptom while still failing to address the real problem is the kind of solution that is not solution at all.
by gmuslera 4y ago
Wasting a lot dealing with a symptom while still failing to address the real problem is the kind of solution that is not solution at all.
- ElijahLynn 4y agoThere are plenty of "us" still working towards addressing the real problem too, there is hope here.
- wiz21c 4y agoPlease do make videos so that we can quickly forget the one from the article which is totally absurd...
- anigbrowl 4y agoSo does posturing. People disagree on the real problem: some think it's fossil fuels, some thinks it's overpopulation, some think it's industrialization. Can you be briefly specific about your focus and preferred outcome?
- gmuslera 4y agoReduce greatly the extraction and use of fossil fuels (cleaner energy sources, efficient and not for leisure travel) at the same time than massive carbon capture efforts. And I mean not to keep emissions as something is being captured, as some "green" alternatives are trying to be sold, like capture carbon into fuels that will be released shortly anyway. At a big enough scale, GHG may start to reduce globally. That is the disease. Without that won't be any solution, just fragile mitigations in our way to the end of civilization as we know it. No matter how expensive or damaging it looks, the alternative will be always worse. If, besides doing that, you want to add some mitigation to the warming, and that don't slow down nor stop GHG reduction, be may guest. But applying nail polish instead of stopping an hemorrhage is somewhat shortsighted, priorities should be clear.
- julienb_sea 4y agoFantasizing that we can eliminate and reverse fossil fuel emissions without dramatically affecting global standard of living (acutely in less developed societies) is also a non-solution. We are going to have to deal with slowing but non-zero emissions for a long time, which essentially implies we will need to "deal with the symptom" as a primary remediation action.
- wiz21c 4y ago> dramatically affecting global standard of living What's wrong with that ? That's the issue many have and fortunately, you tell it like it is. People don't want to change. Public transportation, changing the "dream of traveling" into another one, having electronic that lasts for 10 years instead of 5, better insulation, and the list goes on. Yes, one can change the global standard of living into other not lesser global standard. Or you think it's already too late and then, well, it's effectively too late.
- baggy_trough 4y ago> What's wrong with that? I should think that was fairly obvious. People do not like to be "dramatically" poorer, or even just a little.
- elefanten 4y agoYou can’t expect a majority to understand, much less accept, the probabilistic systems thinking required to conclude (and act on) dedevelopment. Ambitious (and probably also clueless/disbelieving) ideologues will spin junk food narratives that move the masses. And you will have war everywhere. So it makes sense to roll the dice on remediation and hope slow social change takes. The only alternative is a horrible age for humanity, one way or another.
- ncmncm 4y agoEconomic forces are not slow. Renewables are radically cheaper than any other energy source. Getting out of the way of such change is all we need for it to happen very, very fast. Distracting people with things that will not end up working brings catastrophe nearer.
- tick_tock_tick 4y agoI mean it's fine for a system where the only thing that matters is the symptoms. The only reason we care about the extra CO2 in the air is because it's effect on the planets temperature; if we fixed that who cares about the CO2?
- chmod600 4y agoThere's also ocean acidification.
- ncmncm 4y agoYes. Ocean acidification -> ecosystem collapse -> global civilization collapse. There is only one way that works. All others mean disaster.
- oneoff786 4y agoEverything that depends on the ocean, which is everything.
- ncmncm 4y agoCivilization collapsing might be considered an effect.
- englishrookie 4y agoWe need a quick fix. I'm based in the Netherlands, two thirds of which is threatened by a sea level rise within the next hundred years. If that sounds far away to you: my grandmother died at age 99. There's a very reasonable chance my children, teenagers right now, will live through this.
- natch 4y agoYes I expect unfortunately Netherlands real estate prices will be crashing hard very soon. People who like looking ahead when investing should be thinking the same about all coastal and low lying regions. Resale value will be nil. By the time a 30 year mortgage is over, the next buyer will be looking to the end of their own 30 year mortgage, and what they see won’t look good. So there will be no buyers. People don’t want to leave worthless property to their children, so the smart people who foresee this chain of events will get out now.
- rdevsrex 4y agoOk, for that to be true, what degree of warming will cause the sea to rise more than mitigations can be put in place? If we keep warming to 3 degrees, do you think the sea works will not be enough?
- ncmncm 4y agoIt won't matter, because civilization will collapse when ocean ecosystem does, before then. Collapsing civilization is bad for property values. And for the concept of property as such.
- natch 4y agoIt seems likely the sea rise will be a multi-century, unrelenting, ongoing event of rise upon rise that will not stop at the levels envisaged by anyone planning any mitigations. So, no. There is a reason scientists are concerned. On the positive side for the Netherlands, their expertise will be coveted worldwide as hapless nations futilely seek to forestall the inevitable stage by stage.
- 4y ago
- sauwan 4y agoWhy can't we address the symptoms as well as the causes?
- ncmncm 4y agoBecause addressing symptoms costs money that can then not be spent on the causes. And, addressing symptoms does not actually put off catastrophe.
- AlgorithmicTime 4y ago
- sauwan 4y agoI'm not sure you understand how much baked-in catastrophe we already have in store for us. Even with 0 new emissions starting tomorrow, we will still need to address the changes that are coming our way over the next decades... Unfortunately we past the point of just needing to address the causes. This patient is in the hospital and needs all the medical intervention we can provide.
- ncmncm 4y agoPutting the patient in an ice bath reduces fever, fast. But it does not save the patient. Instead, it actively interferes with controlling the infection, thus with saving the patient. We have an antibiotic that would work. We just need to use it. Each second's delay administering the antibiotic increases odds of death.
- mekoka 4y agoKeeping with your medical analogy, palliative care exists because it's just practical to acknowledge that treating a disease is also about dealing with human nature. You can't just focus on the illness and ignore the discomfort it (and the treatment) will create. Every effort counts.
- jdauriemma 4y agoWe are making progress on CO2, it's just not nearly fast enough. This solution potentially treats the symptoms quickly while we slowly cure the disease.