4 ms·

I meant the leaders of the environmental movement, they can’t seem to agree on a strategy or proposal that is realistic. Nuclear is still opposed by many green

I meant the leaders of the environmental movement, they can’t seem to agree on a strategy or proposal that is realistic. Nuclear is still opposed by many green groups. Why is collapse certain but adaptation is impossible? I code a bit and I understand the metaphor but I don’t agree with the premise. Revolution would cause more carbon pollution than reform and likely make our eco problems worse. Where is the evidence that the world is beyond reform? I don’t think an explanation would detract. If you say one solution hasn’t worked and say we need a different category of solution, surely you need to define the category? Of course it’s dangerous, but if climate change is an existential threat then besides reform, it is the most realistic solution that exists. I’d take the risk of geoengineering over a political revolution any day.

myshpa 3y ago
I spent a lot of time on this reply. When it led nowhere due to complex topics and numerous questions, I saved the draft for another response and turned to ChatGPT instead. I have work to do, so I apologize in advance. --- You might think enough's being done. But my take? Not even close. Our environment's carrying capacity? We've overshot it. And it's getting worse fast. All our politicians seem to be doing is upping just the renewable energy game, but it's too little and too slow. E.g. animal species 70% decline in the last 50 years, 80% of insects gone, 90% sharks, empty seas by 2040's, rapid melting of glaciers/polar regions, slowing of AMOC / thermohaline circulation. We could have large scale crop failures, billions of migrants, famines, wars ... all within next few decades. We're pretty much on the "business as usual" path from "The Limits of Growth" by The Club of Rome. Some recent studies revisited it and yup, we're on that trajectory. I think I've mentioned that to you before :) I'll simply say that this year has been extreme in terms of climate. It's truly frightening. I'd highlight the polar ice extents, sea temperatures, the threat of the AMOC collapsing, droughts, crop failures... the list just go on. Reply to your comment (with the help of ChatGPT): - Disagreements within the Environmental Movement: It's true that within the environmental movement, as with many movements, there is no monolithic consensus. Various groups and individuals have different priorities, risk assessments, and strategies. Nuclear power, for instance, is divisive. On one hand, it offers a carbon-free source of abundant power; on the other, concerns about waste disposal, nuclear proliferation, and accidents like Fukushima linger. - Collapse vs. Adaptation: Many experts believe that parts of our system might face difficulties, leading to local collapses, but this doesn't mean that adaptation is impossible. Humans have historically shown remarkable resilience and adaptability. Others argue that systemic vulnerabilities and interconnected challenges are too overwhelming for mere adaptation. They believe that historical examples of societal collapses provide cautionary tales for our current trajectory. - Revolution vs. Reform: A sudden revolution or abrupt systemic change can lead to unintended consequences, including potentially more pollution as you pointed out. But the call for revolution often comes from a place of desperation or impatience with the pace of reform. Both approaches have merits and demerits. - Evidence of Irreformability: The belief that the world is beyond reform often stems from observing slow political and systemic responses to escalating environmental issues. Yet, there is evidence of progress in many areas: growth of renewable energy, conservation efforts, and international agreements like the Paris Accord, to name a few. (myshpa: too slow, too little) - Categories of Solutions: (me) stop fossil fuels asap (faster than planned, we'll be at 1.5 Celsius not in 2050, but in a few years, and e.g. insects could die off long before that), reform agriculture (big possibilities to store massive amounnt of carbon in our soils), abolish animal agriculture, plant based diets (stop overfishing, deforestation, biodiversity loss, pollution, soil erosion, eutrophication ... too many positives to be ignored as is), and reforest/rewild pastures, optionally even deserts to store as much carbon and enable return of the biodiversity, then reform/handle financial system, degrowth, ubi, inequality, ... - Geoengineering vs. Political Revolution (me): https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/30/radical-ways-to-fix-the-earth-are-they-magic-bullets-or-just-band-aids https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/30/radical-... “It is not a solution but an extremely dangerous band-aid that covers up the global warming problem without healing it, creating a false and unwarranted sense of climate safety while the core of the problem continues to fester.” Why is collapse possible (environmental reasons only)? - Food Shortages: Disruption in agricultural yields due to changing rainfall patterns, heatwaves, and pests - Water Scarcity: Diminished freshwater sources caused by decreasing snowpack, shrinking glaciers, and changing rainfall patterns - Sea Level Rise: Displacement of millions of people from coastal cities, leading to refugee crises. - Extreme Weather Events: Increased frequency and severity of hurricanes, floods, droughts, and heatwaves damaging infrastructure and affecting livelihoods. - Economic Impact: Decrease in productivity in heat-affected areas, disruption of global trade, and increased costs of adaptation and disaster mitigation. - Health Risks: Spread of diseases like malaria or dengue to new regions, and heat-related illnesses. - Ecosystem Disruption: Loss of biodiversity (pollinators, for example) and death of coral reefs affecting fisheries and communities that depend on them. - Migration and Conflict: Resource scarcity leading to regional conflicts and mass migrations, putting stress on receiving areas. - Feedback Loops: Melting ice increasing ocean warmth (as ice reflects sunlight) or release of methane from permafrost amplifying warming. - Social Disruption: Strain on social systems and institutions as they try to respond to and manage climate-related crises. Few today's links: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/08/drastic-action-needed-to-limit-worsening-extreme-events-in-antarctica-scientists-warn https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/08/drastic-action... ‘Virtually certain’ extreme Antarctic events will get worse without drastic action, scientists warn Record low sea ice levels, the collapse of ice shelves, and surface temperatures 38.5C above average cited as concerns in new review https://i.redd.it/hdlrqdrr3wgb1.png https://i.redd.it/hdlrqdrr3wgb1.png Antarctic sea ice extent 1979-2023 https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/climate-change/19-mass-extinctions-had-co2-levels-were-now-veering-towards-study-warns https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/climate-change/19-m... 19 'mass extinctions' had CO2 levels we're now veering toward, study warns https://theshot.net.au/general-news/murdochs-climate-denial-is-unhinged/ https://theshot.net.au/general-news/murdochs-climate-denial-... During Earth’s hottest year, Murdoch’s climate denial is un-f*ck1ng-hinged https://news.sky.com/story/tumbling-records-and-unprecedented-changes-in-antarctica-prompt-foreign-office-review-of-climate-change-impacts-12935408 https://news.sky.com/story/tumbling-records-and-unprecedente... Climate change: Antarctica could become planet's 'radiator' due to 'extreme' weather, fear scientists carrying out government review https://www.energyportal.eu/news/china-has-approved-more-than-50-gigawatts-of-new-coal-power/128467/ https://www.energyportal.eu/news/china-has-approved-more-tha... China Approves Over 50 Gigawatts of New Coal Power https://www.ecowatch.com/south-america-winter-heat-wave-2023.html https://www.ecowatch.com/south-america-winter-heat-wave-2023... South American Winter Feels Like Summer With Mountain Temperatures Above 100°F https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/25/atlantic-ocean-amoc-climate-change/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/2... Scientists detect sign that a crucial ocean current is near collapse https://research.noaa.gov/2023/06/28/global-ocean-roiled-by-marine-heatwaves-with-more-on-the-way/ https://research.noaa.gov/2023/06/28/global-ocean-roiled-by-... The surface temperatures of about 40% of the global ocean are already high enough to meet the criteria for a marine heatwave — a period of persistent anomalously warm ocean temperatures — which can have significant impacts on marine life as well as coastal communities and economies. The new forecast ... that it will increase to 50% by September, and it could stay that way through the end of the year. “Normally we might expect only about 10% of the world’s oceans to be ‘hot enough’ to be considered a marine heatwave, so it’s remarkable to reach 40% or 50%, even with long-term warming,”. https://zacklabe.com/global-sea-ice-extent-conc/ https://zacklabe.com/global-sea-ice-extent-conc/ Global: Sea-Ice Concentration/Extent/Thickness
- brutusborn 3y ago
  “We are acting too slow”. This is the key question. What is the optimal response? Too fast and we collapse the systems we will need to adapt. Too slow and we will not be able to adapt. The predictions that make you anxious are very uncertain or very far in the future. Being precautions you feel compelled to act ‘quickly.’ But in the history of climate responses rash policies have made problems worse. Take biofuel subsidies causing food shortages in the 3rd world. Or sulphate emissions reductions causing warming over the last 5 years! When we reflexively act without a consistent model with validated assumptions then we do ourselves a disservice. I know of multimillion dollar projects that spent years of work to suit the new sulphate emission limits, and now we find out that may have helped cause record sea surface temperatures. I want action on climate change but I don’t want the solution to cause more damage than the problem itself. Few misc responses: We may be beyond the carrying capacity of the earth in some ways, but most of these (eg soil health, fishing sustainability) is dominated by non-global warming anthro effects, so for those issues we should focus on those more direct causes. Take your claim that 90% of sharks are gone: closest evidence I can find is “90% of the world's open-ocean sharks died off in mystery extinction event 19 million years ago.” Recent shark population decrease is mainly because of demand for shark fin soup, with some effect due to CO2, but surely a tiny effect compared to commercial fishing. Ice melting faster: of course this is true, a warming world causes ice to melt. But the critical point is what are the effects of this and when? If Greenland is going to melt over 10,000 years then adaptation should be relatively easy. Melting in 50 years would be a different story. Will it be a local ecosystem collapse or just a redistribution as species adapt and fill new niches? Most of your claims are worst case scenarios from models with a lot of uncertainty and lack of predictive power. Circulation stopping? Droughts? These are likely to be worse with a warmer world, but how much more likely/worse? Some models predict an increase in farmland as the poles thaw. Some areas experience more rainfall due to increased evaporation. Consider the most reflexive climate action group: extinction rebellion. Their current goal is to stop UK oil and gas development. What would be the likely result of this? Historically when a multinational oil and gas corporation can’t develop in their preferred location they… develop in another location. The other locations are likely to be deep sea or 3rd world countries with less regulation. Both options result in worse environmental outcomes including worse emissions. This is why the ‘revolution’ options aren’t wise: there are basically no known paths to revolution which don’t involve mass conflict and the alternative, reform, is still possible. One point that did confuse me: why is global trade threatened?

myshpa 3y ago

I spent a lot of time on this reply. When it led nowhere due to complex topics and numerous questions, I saved the draft for another response and turned to ChatGPT instead. I have work to do, so I apologize in advance. --- You might think enough's being done. But my take? Not even close. Our environment's carrying capacity? We've overshot it. And it's getting worse fast. All our politicians seem to be doing is upping just the renewable energy game, but it's too little and too slow. E.g. animal species 70% decline in the last 50 years, 80% of insects gone, 90% sharks, empty seas by 2040's, rapid melting of glaciers/polar regions, slowing of AMOC / thermohaline circulation. We could have large scale crop failures, billions of migrants, famines, wars ... all within next few decades. We're pretty much on the "business as usual" path from "The Limits of Growth" by The Club of Rome. Some recent studies revisited it and yup, we're on that trajectory. I think I've mentioned that to you before :) I'll simply say that this year has been extreme in terms of climate. It's truly frightening. I'd highlight the polar ice extents, sea temperatures, the threat of the AMOC collapsing, droughts, crop failures... the list just go on. Reply to your comment (with the help of ChatGPT): - Disagreements within the Environmental Movement: It's true that within the environmental movement, as with many movements, there is no monolithic consensus. Various groups and individuals have different priorities, risk assessments, and strategies. Nuclear power, for instance, is divisive. On one hand, it offers a carbon-free source of abundant power; on the other, concerns about waste disposal, nuclear proliferation, and accidents like Fukushima linger. - Collapse vs. Adaptation: Many experts believe that parts of our system might face difficulties, leading to local collapses, but this doesn't mean that adaptation is impossible. Humans have historically shown remarkable resilience and adaptability. Others argue that systemic vulnerabilities and interconnected challenges are too overwhelming for mere adaptation. They believe that historical examples of societal collapses provide cautionary tales for our current trajectory. - Revolution vs. Reform: A sudden revolution or abrupt systemic change can lead to unintended consequences, including potentially more pollution as you pointed out. But the call for revolution often comes from a place of desperation or impatience with the pace of reform. Both approaches have merits and demerits. - Evidence of Irreformability: The belief that the world is beyond reform often stems from observing slow political and systemic responses to escalating environmental issues. Yet, there is evidence of progress in many areas: growth of renewable energy, conservation efforts, and international agreements like the Paris Accord, to name a few. (myshpa: too slow, too little) - Categories of Solutions: (me) stop fossil fuels asap (faster than planned, we'll be at 1.5 Celsius not in 2050, but in a few years, and e.g. insects could die off long before that), reform agriculture (big possibilities to store massive amounnt of carbon in our soils), abolish animal agriculture, plant based diets (stop overfishing, deforestation, biodiversity loss, pollution, soil erosion, eutrophication ... too many positives to be ignored as is), and reforest/rewild pastures, optionally even deserts to store as much carbon and enable return of the biodiversity, then reform/handle financial system, degrowth, ubi, inequality, ... - Geoengineering vs. Political Revolution (me): https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/30/radical-ways-to-fix-the-earth-are-they-magic-bullets-or-just-band-aids https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jul/30/radical-... “It is not a solution but an extremely dangerous band-aid that covers up the global warming problem without healing it, creating a false and unwarranted sense of climate safety while the core of the problem continues to fester.” Why is collapse possible (environmental reasons only)? - Food Shortages: Disruption in agricultural yields due to changing rainfall patterns, heatwaves, and pests - Water Scarcity: Diminished freshwater sources caused by decreasing snowpack, shrinking glaciers, and changing rainfall patterns - Sea Level Rise: Displacement of millions of people from coastal cities, leading to refugee crises. - Extreme Weather Events: Increased frequency and severity of hurricanes, floods, droughts, and heatwaves damaging infrastructure and affecting livelihoods. - Economic Impact: Decrease in productivity in heat-affected areas, disruption of global trade, and increased costs of adaptation and disaster mitigation. - Health Risks: Spread of diseases like malaria or dengue to new regions, and heat-related illnesses. - Ecosystem Disruption: Loss of biodiversity (pollinators, for example) and death of coral reefs affecting fisheries and communities that depend on them. - Migration and Conflict: Resource scarcity leading to regional conflicts and mass migrations, putting stress on receiving areas. - Feedback Loops: Melting ice increasing ocean warmth (as ice reflects sunlight) or release of methane from permafrost amplifying warming. - Social Disruption: Strain on social systems and institutions as they try to respond to and manage climate-related crises. Few today's links: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/08/drastic-action-needed-to-limit-worsening-extreme-events-in-antarctica-scientists-warn https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/08/drastic-action... ‘Virtually certain’ extreme Antarctic events will get worse without drastic action, scientists warn Record low sea ice levels, the collapse of ice shelves, and surface temperatures 38.5C above average cited as concerns in new review https://i.redd.it/hdlrqdrr3wgb1.png https://i.redd.it/hdlrqdrr3wgb1.png Antarctic sea ice extent 1979-2023 https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/climate-change/19-mass-extinctions-had-co2-levels-were-now-veering-towards-study-warns https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/climate-change/19-m... 19 'mass extinctions' had CO2 levels we're now veering toward, study warns https://theshot.net.au/general-news/murdochs-climate-denial-is-unhinged/ https://theshot.net.au/general-news/murdochs-climate-denial-... During Earth’s hottest year, Murdoch’s climate denial is un-f*ck1ng-hinged https://news.sky.com/story/tumbling-records-and-unprecedented-changes-in-antarctica-prompt-foreign-office-review-of-climate-change-impacts-12935408 https://news.sky.com/story/tumbling-records-and-unprecedente... Climate change: Antarctica could become planet's 'radiator' due to 'extreme' weather, fear scientists carrying out government review https://www.energyportal.eu/news/china-has-approved-more-than-50-gigawatts-of-new-coal-power/128467/ https://www.energyportal.eu/news/china-has-approved-more-tha... China Approves Over 50 Gigawatts of New Coal Power https://www.ecowatch.com/south-america-winter-heat-wave-2023.html https://www.ecowatch.com/south-america-winter-heat-wave-2023... South American Winter Feels Like Summer With Mountain Temperatures Above 100°F https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/25/atlantic-ocean-amoc-climate-change/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/07/2... Scientists detect sign that a crucial ocean current is near collapse https://research.noaa.gov/2023/06/28/global-ocean-roiled-by-marine-heatwaves-with-more-on-the-way/ https://research.noaa.gov/2023/06/28/global-ocean-roiled-by-... The surface temperatures of about 40% of the global ocean are already high enough to meet the criteria for a marine heatwave — a period of persistent anomalously warm ocean temperatures — which can have significant impacts on marine life as well as coastal communities and economies. The new forecast ... that it will increase to 50% by September, and it could stay that way through the end of the year. “Normally we might expect only about 10% of the world’s oceans to be ‘hot enough’ to be considered a marine heatwave, so it’s remarkable to reach 40% or 50%, even with long-term warming,”. https://zacklabe.com/global-sea-ice-extent-conc/ https://zacklabe.com/global-sea-ice-extent-conc/ Global: Sea-Ice Concentration/Extent/Thickness

brutusborn 3y ago
“We are acting too slow”. This is the key question. What is the optimal response? Too fast and we collapse the systems we will need to adapt. Too slow and we will not be able to adapt. The predictions that make you anxious are very uncertain or very far in the future. Being precautions you feel compelled to act ‘quickly.’ But in the history of climate responses rash policies have made problems worse. Take biofuel subsidies causing food shortages in the 3rd world. Or sulphate emissions reductions causing warming over the last 5 years! When we reflexively act without a consistent model with validated assumptions then we do ourselves a disservice. I know of multimillion dollar projects that spent years of work to suit the new sulphate emission limits, and now we find out that may have helped cause record sea surface temperatures. I want action on climate change but I don’t want the solution to cause more damage than the problem itself. Few misc responses: We may be beyond the carrying capacity of the earth in some ways, but most of these (eg soil health, fishing sustainability) is dominated by non-global warming anthro effects, so for those issues we should focus on those more direct causes. Take your claim that 90% of sharks are gone: closest evidence I can find is “90% of the world's open-ocean sharks died off in mystery extinction event 19 million years ago.” Recent shark population decrease is mainly because of demand for shark fin soup, with some effect due to CO2, but surely a tiny effect compared to commercial fishing. Ice melting faster: of course this is true, a warming world causes ice to melt. But the critical point is what are the effects of this and when? If Greenland is going to melt over 10,000 years then adaptation should be relatively easy. Melting in 50 years would be a different story. Will it be a local ecosystem collapse or just a redistribution as species adapt and fill new niches? Most of your claims are worst case scenarios from models with a lot of uncertainty and lack of predictive power. Circulation stopping? Droughts? These are likely to be worse with a warmer world, but how much more likely/worse? Some models predict an increase in farmland as the poles thaw. Some areas experience more rainfall due to increased evaporation. Consider the most reflexive climate action group: extinction rebellion. Their current goal is to stop UK oil and gas development. What would be the likely result of this? Historically when a multinational oil and gas corporation can’t develop in their preferred location they… develop in another location. The other locations are likely to be deep sea or 3rd world countries with less regulation. Both options result in worse environmental outcomes including worse emissions. This is why the ‘revolution’ options aren’t wise: there are basically no known paths to revolution which don’t involve mass conflict and the alternative, reform, is still possible. One point that did confuse me: why is global trade threatened?