3 ms·
In the strict sense, "civilization" will be over, and 99% of human life would be over. But sure, it won't end humanity with one CO2 doubling, although more than
by OutOfHere 2y ago
In the strict sense, "civilization" will be over, and 99% of human life would be over. But sure, it won't end humanity with one CO2 doubling, although more than one doubling is quite possible.
Afaik, greenhouses usually concentrate heat rather than expel it. To expel heat, substantial air conditioning is required, which requires an industrial civilization, perhaps even some computing capacity for feedback control, and a powerful source of energy. I don't see these prerequisites being met. The few remaining humans could perhaps survive on Antarctica if they can shield themselves from the ozone hole and UVC radiation.
- bryanlarsen 2y agoWhy would 99% of human life be over? If we covered the world with greenhouses we could feed trillions of people. We don't need to do that, we only need to feed 9 billion. > requires an industrial civilization, perhaps even some computing capacity for feedback control, and a powerful source of energy. I don't see these prerequisites being met. The powerful source of energy could be solar panels which we are currently producing at the rate of TW's per year. Solar panels are very resilient to disaster due to their highly distributed nature.
- OutOfHere 2y agoClimate change is not just global warming. It adds storms that keep destroying infrastructure and killing people. It also adds acid rain. Solar panels are great but are easily impacted by hail and dust.
- bryanlarsen 2y agoNot even Russian missiles can completely take out Ukrainian solar farms.
- M95D 2y agoHail affects a much larger area than a missile. Cluster bombs would be effective, but they were banned. And why would anyone waste a missile on a solar farm when they could target a transformer station or a transport line that distributes power from lots and lots of power sources?
- bryanlarsen 2y agoSolar farms are generally hardened to withstand once-in-a-decade level of hailstorms, and are only susceptible to once-in-a-century level hail. Once-in-a-century level hail will take out infrastructure too, so your argument about missiles again applies -- better the distributed nature of solar than the concentrated nature of infrastructure.
- Yizahi 2y agoWe can't feed billions of people from greenhouses. Humans doesn't work like in a videogame, where "all tribes have united to build a starship!..". If our crops will start to fail we won't start building tech. Will start war(s). Big ones, to simply take whatever other countries have. Think "migrants - bad" bogeyman but x100 and you are starving now.