4 ms·

> Speaking in Tonga, during a meeting of Pacific Island leaders, Guterres said “This is a crazy situation: rising seas are a crisis entirely of humanity’s makin

> Speaking in Tonga, during a meeting of Pacific Island leaders, Guterres said “This is a crazy situation: rising seas are a crisis entirely of humanity’s making. Kind of ironic given the flight from the UN headquarters to Tonga generates nearly 1500 kg of CO2 per person. Loves the drink but curses the bottle.

PaulHoule 2y ago
A young person who grew up in my rural community and was on the town board for a while flew to a conference in South Africa on climate change which was one of the worst possible places you could have one. I’ve been thinking about what carbon price would change people’s behavior and incentivize alternatives, $100 a ton is a round number close to estimates of what it costs to capture carbon from an oil refinery or coal burning power plant. It adds $1 a gallon to gas prices which people would bitch about in the US (e.g. Kamala Harris’s answer to “what do you do about climate change” in the debate was basically “drill baby drill” because she wants to win) but I don’t think would change behavior (gas was $1 a gallon before and I didn’t change my driving habits; $500 a year more in gas is not quite enough to make an EV attractive, 3x that is getting there) Similarly adding $150 to that ticket isn’t going to stop people from making that flight.
- legitster 2y ago
  I think that's just it. Politicians are just going to play both sides whenever they can so we can't expect them to be different. But blaming oil companies for providing for consumer demand while they also propping up modern Western economies is kind of pointless. Oil companies have even signaled a willingness to divest from their products. Investment in new exploration was at an all time low until the current administration actively encouraged the industry to expand.
- hannob 2y ago
  > $100 a ton is a round number close to estimates of what it costs to capture > carbon from an oil refinery or coal burning power plant That's a wildly optimistic number, and almost certainly too low for the carbon sources yoU're naming. Equinor estimated over 600USD for gas burners at an LNG plant, under almost ideal conditions (existing nearby storage site, company with lots of experience): https://industrydecarbonization.com/news/is-carbon-capture-and-storage-more-expensive-than-we-thought.html https://industrydecarbonization.com/news/is-carbon-capture-a...
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    Wouldn't cost vary with efficiency. I expect capturing 1% of output is much cheaper than 99% when per ton pricing is calculated.
zackmorris 2y ago
I thought the "Al Gore flies first class so let's not do anything about global warming" trope was dead, but I guess not. That said, it would be refreshing if public figures led by example. So if we're serious about changing public perception, maybe we should create viable alternatives to jet airline travel and encourage them to use them. Here viable means getting there with comparable travel time and cost but fewer CO2 emissions. Until then, without viable alternatives, criticizing environmentalists for traveling the way everyone else does is not a great look, and I think we're entering an era where we'll be seeing influencers and politicians called out for it in real time.
- ravenstine 2y ago
  They're never going to do that. To them, we are ants in their ant farm.
- ghaff 2y ago
  >Here viable means getting there with comparable travel time and cost but fewer CO2 emissions. That's the rub. It's rarely comparable travel time except some point to points. Even in Europe. I travel by train within Europe (mostly) whenever I can. But it usually takes longer, costs more, and may involve sleepers on longer routes.
- legitster 2y ago
  To the contrary, "sacrifice for thee but not for me" is not real leadership. They can't advocate that the work of common people is less important and can therefor be done by Zoom. To your point, I don't think people take umbrage with creating or advocating for compelling alternatives. But there's a difference between that and playing the blame game.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - chipdart 2y ago
    > To the contrary, "sacrifice for thee but not for me" is not real leadership. Right, it's indeed the "Al Gore flies first class so let's not do anything about global warming" zombie rising from the dead. Your type won't shut up with this nonsense until you hear a hermit saying it from the comfort of his hut. Except you won't listen then as well.
dewey 2y ago
A bit of a weird complaint, do you expect people that work on the topic and are aware of it to just stay at home and live off the land? Change isn't happening instantly.

PaulHoule 2y ago

A young person who grew up in my rural community and was on the town board for a while flew to a conference in South Africa on climate change which was one of the worst possible places you could have one. I’ve been thinking about what carbon price would change people’s behavior and incentivize alternatives, $100 a ton is a round number close to estimates of what it costs to capture carbon from an oil refinery or coal burning power plant. It adds $1 a gallon to gas prices which people would bitch about in the US (e.g. Kamala Harris’s answer to “what do you do about climate change” in the debate was basically “drill baby drill” because she wants to win) but I don’t think would change behavior (gas was $1 a gallon before and I didn’t change my driving habits; $500 a year more in gas is not quite enough to make an EV attractive, 3x that is getting there) Similarly adding $150 to that ticket isn’t going to stop people from making that flight.

legitster 2y ago
I think that's just it. Politicians are just going to play both sides whenever they can so we can't expect them to be different. But blaming oil companies for providing for consumer demand while they also propping up modern Western economies is kind of pointless. Oil companies have even signaled a willingness to divest from their products. Investment in new exploration was at an all time low until the current administration actively encouraged the industry to expand.
hannob 2y ago
> $100 a ton is a round number close to estimates of what it costs to capture > carbon from an oil refinery or coal burning power plant That's a wildly optimistic number, and almost certainly too low for the carbon sources yoU're naming. Equinor estimated over 600USD for gas burners at an LNG plant, under almost ideal conditions (existing nearby storage site, company with lots of experience): https://industrydecarbonization.com/news/is-carbon-capture-and-storage-more-expensive-than-we-thought.html https://industrydecarbonization.com/news/is-carbon-capture-a...
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  Wouldn't cost vary with efficiency. I expect capturing 1% of output is much cheaper than 99% when per ton pricing is calculated.

zackmorris 2y ago

I thought the "Al Gore flies first class so let's not do anything about global warming" trope was dead, but I guess not. That said, it would be refreshing if public figures led by example. So if we're serious about changing public perception, maybe we should create viable alternatives to jet airline travel and encourage them to use them. Here viable means getting there with comparable travel time and cost but fewer CO2 emissions. Until then, without viable alternatives, criticizing environmentalists for traveling the way everyone else does is not a great look, and I think we're entering an era where we'll be seeing influencers and politicians called out for it in real time.

ravenstine 2y ago
They're never going to do that. To them, we are ants in their ant farm.
ghaff 2y ago
>Here viable means getting there with comparable travel time and cost but fewer CO2 emissions. That's the rub. It's rarely comparable travel time except some point to points. Even in Europe. I travel by train within Europe (mostly) whenever I can. But it usually takes longer, costs more, and may involve sleepers on longer routes.
legitster 2y ago
To the contrary, "sacrifice for thee but not for me" is not real leadership. They can't advocate that the work of common people is less important and can therefor be done by Zoom. To your point, I don't think people take umbrage with creating or advocating for compelling alternatives. But there's a difference between that and playing the blame game.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- chipdart 2y ago
  > To the contrary, "sacrifice for thee but not for me" is not real leadership. Right, it's indeed the "Al Gore flies first class so let's not do anything about global warming" zombie rising from the dead. Your type won't shut up with this nonsense until you hear a hermit saying it from the comfort of his hut. Except you won't listen then as well.

dewey 2y ago

A bit of a weird complaint, do you expect people that work on the topic and are aware of it to just stay at home and live off the land? Change isn't happening instantly.