3 ms·

> Climate change is used as a bat to hit poor people in the head politically I am sure the poor people who are suffering through the droughts in Europe, floods

> Climate change is used as a bat to hit poor people in the head politically I am sure the poor people who are suffering through the droughts in Europe, floods in Pakistan, increased erosion in Senegal and the hottest ever temperatures in Death Valley would disagree. Climate change is happening and the science has been ignored for far too long.

thrown_22 4y ago
Yes, we could have solved it with nuclear power in the 1960s. We still can, but we could have too.
- threeseed 4y ago
  People can push nuclear as much as they like. But right now cost wise it's massively uncompetitive with solar/wind + storage.
  - thrown_22 4y ago
    >solar/wind + storage. Then why are energy prices rising in every grid the more renewables it uses?
    - threeseed 4y ago
      It's not unless you have evidence to the contrary. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-14/renewable-energy-provides-relief-from-rising-power-prices https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-14/renewable...
    - elihu 4y ago
      Electricity is a fungible resource and most of it is generated from fossil fuels. The price of natural gas is way up, so electricity prices generally are up. Not to mention, hydroelectric production is down in some places (Hoover dam for instance), some nuclear plants are running below capacity because rivers are too low and/or too warm (France) and there's a major land war in Europe right now. It's also possible that some investments in renewables will take time to pay off, like any investment in new infrastructure. I'd expect the same thing if some area built a brand new coal plant. (Ideally these costs are buffered out by some kind of financial instrument so rate-payers don't get hit by it all at once.) Solar power is actually quite cheap. Storage can be cheap or expensive depending on whether it's done with pumped hydro (where geography allows) or chemical batteries.
ErikVandeWater 4y ago
I could list 1000 places that are experiencing more moderate conditions than usual right now. My point is, anecdotal evidence is not meaningful for something as multifaceted as world climate.
- threeseed 4y ago
  No one has ever claimed that climate change would not benefit some areas. The point is that the costs to adapt to this change will be in the trillions and be disproportionally felt by the poorest in our society. Hence it is a change we should avoid where possible.
  - ErikVandeWater 4y ago
    > No one has ever claimed that climate change would not benefit some areas. False. Some people are saying the world will end and humanity will be wiped away.
    - imtringued 4y ago
      I'm pretty sure we could get that far if we really wanted but it would take some determination.
    - blooalien 4y ago
      > "Some people are saying the world will end and humanity will be wiped away." I personally believe there may be more truth to that statement than many wish to believe, but not as a direct result of climate change itself. Rather, it's much more likely that the growing stupidity and political polarization surrounding climate change (and many other "hot-button" topics) will drive humanity to the ultimate stupidity of another World War, which these days can absolutely be a life-ending (on a planetary scale) path to go down, considering the types of "mass destruction" weapons the mad-men in power these days have access to.
      - adrianN 4y ago
        There is also a chance that we manage to kill most phytoplankton. That would make the planet very unpleasant for a while.

thrown_22 4y ago

Yes, we could have solved it with nuclear power in the 1960s. We still can, but we could have too.

threeseed 4y ago
People can push nuclear as much as they like. But right now cost wise it's massively uncompetitive with solar/wind + storage.
- thrown_22 4y ago
  >solar/wind + storage. Then why are energy prices rising in every grid the more renewables it uses?
  - threeseed 4y ago
    It's not unless you have evidence to the contrary. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-14/renewable-energy-provides-relief-from-rising-power-prices https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-14/renewable...
  - elihu 4y ago
    Electricity is a fungible resource and most of it is generated from fossil fuels. The price of natural gas is way up, so electricity prices generally are up. Not to mention, hydroelectric production is down in some places (Hoover dam for instance), some nuclear plants are running below capacity because rivers are too low and/or too warm (France) and there's a major land war in Europe right now. It's also possible that some investments in renewables will take time to pay off, like any investment in new infrastructure. I'd expect the same thing if some area built a brand new coal plant. (Ideally these costs are buffered out by some kind of financial instrument so rate-payers don't get hit by it all at once.) Solar power is actually quite cheap. Storage can be cheap or expensive depending on whether it's done with pumped hydro (where geography allows) or chemical batteries.

ErikVandeWater 4y ago

I could list 1000 places that are experiencing more moderate conditions than usual right now. My point is, anecdotal evidence is not meaningful for something as multifaceted as world climate.

threeseed 4y ago
No one has ever claimed that climate change would not benefit some areas. The point is that the costs to adapt to this change will be in the trillions and be disproportionally felt by the poorest in our society. Hence it is a change we should avoid where possible.
- ErikVandeWater 4y ago
  > No one has ever claimed that climate change would not benefit some areas. False. Some people are saying the world will end and humanity will be wiped away.
  - imtringued 4y ago
    I'm pretty sure we could get that far if we really wanted but it would take some determination.
  - blooalien 4y ago
    > "Some people are saying the world will end and humanity will be wiped away." I personally believe there may be more truth to that statement than many wish to believe, but not as a direct result of climate change itself. Rather, it's much more likely that the growing stupidity and political polarization surrounding climate change (and many other "hot-button" topics) will drive humanity to the ultimate stupidity of another World War, which these days can absolutely be a life-ending (on a planetary scale) path to go down, considering the types of "mass destruction" weapons the mad-men in power these days have access to.
    - adrianN 4y ago
      There is also a chance that we manage to kill most phytoplankton. That would make the planet very unpleasant for a while.