8 ms·
Every year we find out climate change is worse than expected and accelerating faster than expected. I'm not saying this as a way to minimize these findings but
by pier25 4y ago
Every year we find out climate change is worse than expected and accelerating faster than expected.
I'm not saying this as a way to minimize these findings but rather to point out that we should expect things to get worse.
Humanity needs to act now.
- scotty79 4y agoNothing gets done until property prices are affected.
- yieldcrv 4y agoI love how the cookie popup takes up half the screen on mobile with a button saying “I’m OK with that”
- wlesieutre 4y agoI wouldn't pay much for property in Florida knowing the ongoing insurance situation https://www.pnj.com/story/news/2023/04/18/florida-insurance-crisis-why-home-insurance-rates-keep-going-up/70127553007/ https://www.pnj.com/story/news/2023/04/18/florida-insurance-...
- toomuchtodo 4y agoFlorida insurance costs were driven up, primarily, by rampant litigation and fraud [1], not climate change. With that said, insurers are starting to price in the realized risk [2]. Assuming built to modern code (post 2002) and elevation above flood and storm surge risk, homes in Florida are resilient to all but the most powerful storms (Cat 4, Cat 5). Of course, code will need to be revisited if housing must resist the occasional 200+ mph storm (primarily roof to wall attachment and roof shape, as well as shutters for doors and windows to resist impact [3] [4]; cinder block/concrete exterior walls are very common but not yet mandatory). [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-22/fraud-litigation-push-florida-s-home-insurers-into-insolvency https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-22/fraud-lit... | https://archive.is/Njkww https://archive.is/Njkww [2] https://www.mic.com/impact/climate-change-is-ravaging-florida-so-why-is-everyone-buying-homes-there-82748262 https://www.mic.com/impact/climate-change-is-ravaging-florid... [3] https://www.floir.com/siteDocuments/OIR-B1-1802.pdf https://www.floir.com/siteDocuments/OIR-B1-1802.pdf [4] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/21/how-to-build-a-hurricane-resistant-house.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/21/how-to-build-a-hurricane-res... (one of my properties is insured by the state's high risk pool at an elevation 90 ft above sea level)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hinkley 4y agoEvery year we find out the guys yelling about this in the 80’s were not wrong.
- joelfried 4y agoEvery year we find out the guys in their 80s running the country don't care because they'll be dead soon.
- _cenw 4y agoWe got surprisingly close, so close that Exxon had a division on renewable energy in the 80s (but then decided to spend that money on lobbying and disinformation instead). Climate Town has a great video essay on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MondapIjAAM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MondapIjAAM
- yongjik 4y agoMeh, the majority of people buying SUVs and flying for vacation aren't in their 80s ...
- sebazzz 4y agoEvery year we find out the people don't care because they are either (1) benefit from looking the other way, (2) are climate changer deniers because they truly don't believe it, (3) find themselves powerless to do something. Do you truly think this gets fixed in any significant way?
- indymike 4y agoHaving been there in the 80s I seem to recall the fear was global cooling, and that we'd all be dead before the turn of the century. Glad they were wrong then. Hopefully, we're wrong now.
- hotpotamus 4y agoWhat science was the fear of global cooling based on?
- qtzaz 4y ago[flagged]
- antibasilisk 4y agoFaster than expected, Venus by Thursday. >Humanity needs to act now. And do what exactly? The kill count from shutting down all emission-producing parts of society would be enormous, and it still wouldn't be enough to keep global warming at a level that is habitable for a good chunk of people on the planet. Net zero carbon by 2030 is a joke, literally nobody is on track to meet those targets and BOE will happen before then at the rate we're going anyway.
- oezi 4y agoIt tragically comical that all it would take is something like 2% of GDP over a couple of years (until 2050) to fix. We rather spend it on the military or pensions.
- quacked 4y ago2% GDP until 2050 would allow for every single chemical and material used in farming, building, and mining in the world to become part of a net zero carbon supply chain?
- oezi 4y ago2% of GDP is the estimate to go 100% renewables for the entire energy sector (not just electricity) for developed countries. For instance for Germany the estimate is 500 to 3000 bn EUR in total.
- quacked 4y agoAnd this would stop global carbon emissions? What about the shipping industry, the mining industries, the fuel required to do all the shipping and mining and farming, etc. etc.? My understanding is that nothing short of a massive, forced reduction in resource consumption will do anything to seriously slow down carbon emissions and curb climate change, if indeed it can be curbed.
- gus_massa 4y agoYou can shut down the military if every other country agree. That looks difficult. But how do shut down pensions?
- kvetching 4y ago[flagged]
- chimpanzee 4y ago> look at the data slightly differently You mean like look at it upside-down? Or with your eyes closed? Please explain.
- morkalork 4y agoI look forward to the future where we'll hear things like: "The earth is flat", "The moon landing was faked", "Those ice sheets never existed", "The ocean level hasn't changed".
- oatmeal1 4y agoThe first step is to eliminate cars as a primary mode of transportation.
- S201 4y agoAnd replace them with what? Because if you're not in or at least near a city you'll be stranded without a car.
- timeon 4y agoWe need to change planning.
- illiarian 4y agoThat is the same level of advice as "humans need to learn how to fly". You not only have to change planning, you also need to change all the existing cities to accomodate that planning
- carapace 4y agoMost cities predate the invention of the automobile.
- illiarian 4y agoThe cores of the cities, yes. And those cores are tiny. There are a few exceptions like London (7 million in the 19th century, 9 million now), but most cities are not London.
- agentultra 4y agoAnd we can do that if the will to do it was there. I suspect those that benefit the most from the subsidies that support their life styles will have the most to complain about.
- 4y ago
- pleb_nz 4y agoIt does and I am not happy with individual persons. Most people are waiting for big corporate entities or the government to do something. Yell that they need to do something, but in the meantime go about the lives as if nothing needs changing. People only care as long as it doesn't affect them and someone else acts or makes the decisions. It's despicable Every person on this planet has the power and responsibility to change and act now, we do not need to wait for government and corporations to change. Waiting is just an excuse, and really is just slowing the desired outcome.
- tiedieconderoga 4y ago>Every person on this planet has the power and responsibility to change and act now, we do not need to wait for government and corporations to change. I would take issue with that statement. It is very difficult to make the sort of personal changes which would eliminate your own footprint. It might be impossible without leaving civilization entirely, largely because of how our societies and markets are structured. Here is the story of a journalist who tried to go a full day without using plastics (disable JS if you get a paywall): https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/11/style/plastic-free.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/11/style/plastic-free.html
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago> eliminate The better is not the enemy of the best.
- pleb_nz 4y agoYou don't have to eliminate and not do you have to do it all in a single step. Everyone is different and in different situations. Just start doing where you can as best you can. Stop consumerism for the hell of it if you can. Stop following fashion trends and wear clothing until it falls from your body. Don't replace your 5ech equipment because it doesn't have the latest feature etc etc. The statement wasn't meant to be taken so literally and fully.
- tiedieconderoga 4y ago
- milesskorpen 4y agoThis is not accurate. Renewable energy is growing faster than expected, and population growth is slowing faster than expected. We do not appear to be on track to meet worst cases scenarios from the IPCC. Note that I'm not saying there won't be/aren't harms, just that the rate of change does not seem to be accelerating.
- jshen 4y agoIs there data showing that the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are declining or plateauing? If not, aren’t you wrong? Edit: here’s a graph. I see no reason to feel optimistic. https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions https://ourworldindata.org/greenhouse-gas-emissions
- wilg 4y agoI mean you can see it plateauing in that data. Feels good to me!
- jshen 4y agoYou can’t draw a conclusion from less than 5 data points. If you look back in time on that graph you can see other points where it was flat for a few years, then skyrocketed. If it’s flat 5 years from now then I’d be inclined to agree with you.
- wilg 4y agoIf you plot the data with a moving average of anywhere from 2-8 years you can clearly see it flattening more now than at any point after 1950 (I didn't bother checking before).
- jshen 4y ago“Flattening more” is too vague to be meaningful, and there is nothing in that data to suggest that greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will stop increasing anytime soon. Nothing. Edit: and here is more damning evidence. Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere over time is not flattening.
- Aaronstotle 4y agoI have decided to hedge my bets on a long life by smoking one cigarette a day.
- thriftwy 4y agoHow is that solar shade coming along?
- thriftwy 4y agoSeriously though, I always post this comment and get downvotes. Are we going to see any realistic solutions to climate change, the ones which do not expose you as a religious person who want to flagellate themself and still be a sinner?
- toomuchtodo 4y agoNo. There will be no solutions. Those who can afford to will take measures to maintain their quality of life, those who can’t will suffer. This might change in a decade or two due to electorate and therefore representation turnover. Until then, you’re on your own. Edit: @thriftwy reply here because of comment throttling Will they though? Sounds like those folks are uniquely positioned to take the brunt of climate change. Hard to say who is going to a) still be living and b) have power that far out into the future. Long story short, do what you can with what you have where you are while staying emotionally healthy and grounded. That’s all that really can be done imho. Take care.
- thriftwy 4y agoWhy all the endless bother across all Western media then? In a decade or two, most of world's electorate, in terms of energy production and manufacturing production capacity, will be people from China, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Brazil and the like. Iran, Uzbekistan and Tunisia. Maybe Nigeria or Congo. You will have to start climate change debate afresh because post-christian flagellation is starting on a seriously wrong foot when talking to these people (to whom I am not a complete stranger). The audience who is now receptive to climate change talks will be largely irrelevant.
- wilg 4y agoSeems like it's actually decelerating (or at least not accelerating), both global temperature and greenhouse emissions? https://climate.nasa.gov/ https://climate.nasa.gov/ https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions
- zo1 4y agoI'm a big "climate skeptic" for two big reasons: 1. The climate problem is way too ideal of a problem that absolutely requires government intervention (at this point anyways). This sets off big red flags for me, because it makes us more dependent and beholden to "savior" government. We can't fix it - only government can! 2. I am more worried about the messed-up, exotic, forever chemicals we're slowly seeping into everything, because at least with climate change we can probably engineer around it on a big scale. These chemicals? That's the stuff of global-scale annihilation by infertility and hormonal changes in our entire species. Think Alex Jones' crazy "the fluoride in the water is turning the frogs gay".