3 ms·

Considering that no matter what we do we will go to 2C, I'm not exactly understanding this article? The UN currently warns that we will go to 3C at the current

Considering that no matter what we do we will go to 2C, I'm not exactly understanding this article? The UN currently warns that we will go to 3C at the current rate: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/world-facing-hellish-3c-of-climate-heating-un-warns-before-cop28 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/world-fa... Is this some kind of lobbyist think-tank article that 1.5C is still achievable? Citing IPCC reports is not funny anymore.

Yizahi 3y ago
This is what greenwashing gets us. Instead of at least attempting combating climate change for real (gas sequestration, sun shield, spraying chems in the atmo), we are busy shuffling existing emissions around with "credits" and label polluting stuff "green". I remember last thread on the gas sequestration on HN ended with a uniform hate on the initiative, because it was proposed by the oil&gas corpos (sure, they are bad, but someone needs to at least start trying to capture and bury GH gasses). Oh well, guess our children will be happy with 490-500 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere by 2100 and all the nice "green" energy around.
- esarbe 3y ago
  I'm not sure if climate engineering should have been the first tool to reach for. Limiting emissions would have definitively been the correct first step. Alas, this comes 40 years too late. The oil and gas companies really kneecapped any action since the 1980ies with their FUD and denialism and sponsored attacks on climate scientists.
  - Yizahi 3y ago
    Actually now that that I think about it I can agree in principle that climate engineering should not be our current priority. Because it is too late for it. The known possible solutions are way too hard and underdeveloped for humanity to even attempt in the reasonable timeframe (100 years for example). We probably should start preparing for the mass cascade failures of ecosystems and instead develop genetically engineered crops for future projected climate zones, and genetically engineered animals, insects, fish etc. to accompany them. Genetically engineered humans too (gasp! horibul eugenics, no wai!).
  - jfengel 3y ago
    Limiting emissions would have definitively been the correct first step. Acknowledging that it's a real thing would have been the correct first step. Instead, we're still deluged with the conspiracy theory that it's all a massive hoax.

Yizahi 3y ago

This is what greenwashing gets us. Instead of at least attempting combating climate change for real (gas sequestration, sun shield, spraying chems in the atmo), we are busy shuffling existing emissions around with "credits" and label polluting stuff "green". I remember last thread on the gas sequestration on HN ended with a uniform hate on the initiative, because it was proposed by the oil&gas corpos (sure, they are bad, but someone needs to at least start trying to capture and bury GH gasses). Oh well, guess our children will be happy with 490-500 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere by 2100 and all the nice "green" energy around.

esarbe 3y ago
I'm not sure if climate engineering should have been the first tool to reach for. Limiting emissions would have definitively been the correct first step. Alas, this comes 40 years too late. The oil and gas companies really kneecapped any action since the 1980ies with their FUD and denialism and sponsored attacks on climate scientists.
- Yizahi 3y ago
  Actually now that that I think about it I can agree in principle that climate engineering should not be our current priority. Because it is too late for it. The known possible solutions are way too hard and underdeveloped for humanity to even attempt in the reasonable timeframe (100 years for example). We probably should start preparing for the mass cascade failures of ecosystems and instead develop genetically engineered crops for future projected climate zones, and genetically engineered animals, insects, fish etc. to accompany them. Genetically engineered humans too (gasp! horibul eugenics, no wai!).
- jfengel 3y ago
  Limiting emissions would have definitively been the correct first step. Acknowledging that it's a real thing would have been the correct first step. Instead, we're still deluged with the conspiracy theory that it's all a massive hoax.