5 ms·
They could have planned for upgrading infrastructure to cope with expected warming trends beginning 35 years ago or so, but that would have entailed admitting t
by photochemsyn 4y ago
They could have planned for upgrading infrastructure to cope with expected warming trends beginning 35 years ago or so, but that would have entailed admitting that the science of atmospheric CO2's effect on climate had essentially been settled since 1980.
Send BP and Shell the bill for the infrastructure upgrade, since they spent so much time and effort on science denialism in the 1980s and 1990s and 2000s.
- epistasis 4y agoSadly to this day there are people who have been politicized into disbelieving the science, which has been very clear for a long time. I fear for our ability to deal with the problems of humanity when so much of our politics is easily fooled people fighting ideological wars for the benefit of others.
- astockwell 4y agoDon't Look Up ;)
- treeman79 4y ago
- epistasis 4y agoWhat politician is enriching themselves with climate change? Especially compared to all the politicians that enrich themselves via denial?
- treeman79 4y agoAl Gore, John Kerry.
- epistasis 4y agoAnd these politicians putting their money where their mouth is means that you disbelieve the science? When people like Joe Manchin refuse to take climate action, due to his investments in fossil fuels, doesn't that make you think we should take climate action? Why does this sort of reasoning go only one way?
- timeon 4y agoInteresting how you want to turn the argument around while the lawns in UK started burning. What for? Did he itched your political indoctrination? It is sad that people needs to choose sides in these things. Wish you had more possibilities to choose from.
- pessimizer 4y agoThere are also some that think that only God can control the weather, so if the world is warming that is His will; and that the end of the world is imminent, and will be the greatest moment in the history of the universe for the faithful. I'd bet that probably 20% of the voter base believes exactly that, and that 10% think that not believing that should be grounds for deportation or imprisonment.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- 88840-8855 4y agoI fully agree. In addition charge back all dividends paid as global warming was long a scientific fact. Profits always must come with responsibilities. Time that people who profited are paying their bills.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hristov 4y agoThe great irony is that BP and Shell did plan for global warming and did upgrade their infrastructure accordingly. Even back in the 80s, they build their ocean drilling rigs to be high above the water knowing full well that they were causing the icebergs to melt and the water level to rise. They just kind of forgot to let us rubes know about it.
- borissk 4y agoThere were plenty of scientists letting the public know about the global warming in the 80s. The public didn't want to know about it.
- einpoklum 4y agoDon't blame "the public". This wasn't some conscious informed choice by millions of people. The public sucks the glass teat of mass media, and the interests controlling it did not want to present global warming as a problem. In fact, this state of affairs has not even changed that significantly.
- borissk 4y agoAll right, but blaming the mass media is not much more helpful. What do suggest - nationalize it all?
- johnsea 4y agoOf course the public was (and is!!) the culprit. Only the individual "footprint" is so small that almost nobody does something. Real structural changes are hard to enforce. There is always something more pressing, just look e.g. at the 100 billion Germany spends on war (how many trees that would give?). As a politician it would be the end of the career if you tried to enforce something really drastic (and so nobody does it, incl. "the greens").
- the_only_law 4y ago> The public sucks the glass teat of mass media Ok I'll blame them for that then.
- pastor_bob 4y agoMuch of the London tube doesn't have AC. Talk about lack of planning. Pretty sure all lines of the NYC Subway had ac 25+ years ago and they're notorious for drawing out project timelines.
- lelandfe 4y agoLittle consolation when you're waiting 15 minutes for the R train on the sweltering platform, ugh. But yeah – sadly London's system used to be pretty cool, but the clay interior has acted like a battery, slowly absorbing the heat, and it simply can't absorb any more. It's a massive engineering problem (and oversight).
- Symbiote 4y agoThe lines without AC were constructed (mostly) in the 19th century. It's not possible to fit AC. Alternative ways to cool the trains have been under investigation for decades, but there isn't an obvious solution.
- treeman79 4y agoThey didn’t need AC in 19h century. The ground itself was cool and kept people comfortable. 200 years of constant usage has heated up the surrounding bedrock.
- Milner08 4y agoIts much harder on the tube, as where do you dump the hot air? Back into the tunnel? London's clay has basically baked around the tube and is a really good insulator. Its not a particularly easy problem to solve.
- munificent 4y agoYou vent it to the surface, at least that's what NYC does.
- Symbiote 4y ago
- DrBazza 4y agoIf by infrastructure, you mean trains, then the UK, like every other country uses rails appropriate to the average temperature. "Network Rail said that its rails have a "stress-free" temperature of 27 degrees." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62182880 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62182880
- bloqs 4y agoWhy would all countries not just use rails that can tolerate all possible temperatures.
- OJFord 4y ago'All possible'? What are all possible temperatures? I think you've answered your own question, if you think about it: a line has to be drawn somewhere, you have to do some sort of statistical analysis, chance of circumstances occuring which this would not cope with <x%, yeah ok good enough, that sort of thing. That's engineering.
- bloqs 4y agoI mean like, a lot of European countries have colder winters and hotter summers than the UK. So why are our rail tracks always broken in snow or in heat?
- smileysteve 4y agoThat's not the way metal works.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Milner08 4y agoBecause that's not possible without a lot of expense. Metal expands thats just basic physics. Its hard to stop that.
- 4y ago
- surement 4y ago> Send BP and Shell the bill for the infrastructure upgrade Should they also get credits for all the progress oil has allowed us to make?
- Quenty 4y agoHave they not already been financially compensated for this?
- surement 4y agoNo, they extract and sell oil and they happen to do it at a profit. This is not the same as being compensated or billed for things that resulted from the use of that oil.
- Jenk 4y agoThat's called _money_.
- psi75 4y ago
- treeman79 4y ago1955 opening day of Disneyland. In temperatures that reached 100 degrees, the fresh asphalt on Main Street, USA melted into a sticky tar that ensnared the high heels of some women https://www.history.com/.amp/news/disneylands-disastrous-opening-day-60-years-ago https://www.history.com/.amp/news/disneylands-disastrous-ope...
- Closi 4y agoThe main reason for this was that they just laid the asphalt too late and it didn’t set in time. Disneyland was built with remarkable pace, with some of the original rides being closer to ‘industrial machinery with chairs attached’ than you might imagine!
- philliphaydon 4y agoThat’s only 37 degrees in normal people temp.
- RGamma 4y agoThat's too expensive. The sheikhs would no longer be able to build their ski resorts in the desert.