9 ms·
2025 was the third hottest year on record
- magneticnorth 10mo agohttps://archive.ph/KVTqO https://archive.ph/KVTqO
- andsoitis 10mo agoRelated: Earth is warming faster. Scientists are closing in on why (https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/12/16/earth-is-warming-faster-scientists-are-closing-in-on-why https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2024/12/16/...)
- vlovich123 10mo agoI’m amused that the argument is that we are in a Mr Burns position where different kinds of pollution we were emitting was balancing out and somehow fighting pollution is the reason global warming is worse? While I’m sure it has some effect, the amount of co2 we pump out every year as a species is insane. The effect of ship pollution mitigating that is marginal at best
- mirekrusin 10mo agoAre you sure? There is a lot of it https://www.shipmap.org https://www.shipmap.org
- pitched 10mo agoSome systems pulling the average up and some pulling down but the average of them is net up. I wonder though if it would have been better or worse for us if the net change ended up negative (dropping temps every year) instead. Probably worse, right?
- greygoo222 10mo agoStratospheric aerosol injection is the leading geoengineering proposal for a reason. If you have well-supported reasons to be skeptical, you should share it, but just saying "idk doesn't sound right to me" isn't convincing.
- EA-3167 10mo agoThe amount of aerosol you need to I next is enormous, it needs to be sprayed at an altitude higher than realistic means of injection are feasible, and it has to be done in a way that doesn’t produce so much CO2 that it defeats the point. Can you imagine an extant tech that can come close to doing that at the required scale? I can’t.
- kevin_thibedeau 10mo agoHigh altitude solar drone gliders that collect low level water vapor and spray it to form ice.
- EA-3167 10mo agoIt would be cheaper and more practical to talk about space-based sunshields, and that’s about as practical as prayer. At the altitudes any realistic glider can reach you’d have to use sulfur aerosols and not ice, and in either case you’d need to inject gigatons per year, every year because at that altitude aerosols are very short-lived. A realistic aircraft capable of those payloads will burn avgas, no solar craft comes close to the capability. The side effects such as a significant increase in acid rain, are not trivial either. These are fantasies of people who cannot accept the reality of what we’re facing.
- vlovich123 10mo agoEven if it were meaningful, is the proposal to fight global warming to keep dirty ships? That’s an insane strategy. More realistically, there’s vested interests in existing ships and shipyards not being made obsolete so any minute effect is overhyped as “this is how we solve global warming”. This reminds me of a conversation I had with an acquaintance - he was convinced that anthropogenic global warming was impossible because a volcanic eruption emits so much CO2 and was completely unwilling to consider evidence that perhaps humans emitting annually 200x more than all volcanoes combined might have an effect.
- estimator7292 10mo ago
- pitched 10mo agohttps://archive.ph/jXcuJ https://archive.ph/jXcuJ
- card_zero 10mo agoWhy: reduced albedo (less reflective clouds) because ships don't have so much sulphur in their fuel any more.
- fschuett 10mo ago[flagged]
- networkadmin 10mo ago[flagged]
- andsoitis 10mo ago> Really? Can they send some of that hotness over to Germany, we're getting snowstorms over here. Yes, really. The warmest recent years (e.g., 2022, 2023, 2024) rank among the highest average temperatures on record for Germany. The rate of warming in recent decades is stronger than the global average, with Germany seeing about 0.38 °C per decade (1971–2022). .... and other similar statistics. Look up. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folgen_der_globalen_Erwärmung_in_Deutschland https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folgen_der_globalen_Erwärmung_...
- networkadmin 10mo ago[flagged]
- ejolto 10mo agoWhat is alarmist about it? It’s just a fact.
- networkadmin 10mo agoShould I spend an hour explaining in detail, only to have my comment be auto-censored again just like the last one was?
- tw04 10mo agoIt wasn’t auto censored. And you didn’t explain anything, you made a silly and provably false statement and were understandably downvoted almost immediately. Just like if you were to claim the moon landing was faked.
- terespuwash 10mo agoA change in attitudes is not enough. Structural change is needed to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Currently, the population is unable to achieve results.
- __MatrixMan__ 10mo agoAgreed. Our ecological goals are to make biosphere damage scarce, but our economic practices aim to make scarce things plentiful. We need something to balance out the effects of scarcity-based economics.
- evolve2k 10mo agoIn the very fun board game ‘Evolution : Climate’ you “breed” animals designed to survive the climate conditions on the board. One strategy is to switch to breeding ‘carnivores’ that then can feast on the creations of other players. They downside tho is that once other players evolve their animals to have carnivore protections (fight back, scales, protective shells etc) the carnivores start to quickly starve and that player must quickly change out of this eat everything strategy back to a more sustainable strategy. In a similar way I think what works is to push back against growth only and growth at all costs approaches and back practises and models and communities that are working in other ways.
- __MatrixMan__ 10mo agoThe trouble is, when I receive my paycheck, it just comes as "dollars". I don't know whether my employer got them by providing services to communities which are working in other ways, or whether they come from more nefarious behavior--and I have no way to refuse one sort but accept the other. The kind of community action you're describing happens, but we need to find ways to help it scale.
- hasanabi 10mo ago[flagged]
- 10mo ago
- cryptoegorophy 10mo agoIs there a real practical solution to this? It seems like all proposed solutions in last 40 years are a drop in the ocean, or just a money grab scams. Only thing that really worked for such global scale is the ozone layer repair. Global warming/climate change I guess we should just accept it and adapt?
- hasley 10mo agoWhat about poor people that live in areas in the world that will become completely uninhabitable?
- coryrc 10mo agoIt's going to happen, so that's exactly what we should be prepared for. I'm sad all ocean megafauna are going to be extinct.
- jl6 10mo agoBefore areas become completely uninhabitable, we will see areas become increasingly stressed: heat waves, more extreme weather events, poorer crop yields, depleting aquifers. Stress increases conflict risk. Fights for essential resources (land, water, food, shelter) will break out long before those essential resources are completely gone. If we skip past the immense suffering and death part, we will probably end up on a planet where national borders have been redrawn by war and desperation, and a smaller population that lives in more northerly climes.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- CGMthrowaway 10mo agoPerhaps they are part of the depopulation agenda.
- jandrese 10mo agoOur politicians are already thinking about them, which is why they are cracking down on immigration and generating relentless propaganda demonizing refugees and asylum seekers.
- doktor2un 10mo agoI’d love to see the raw data.
- rwmj 10mo agohttps://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/datasets https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/datasets
- doktor2un 10mo ago[flagged]
- ori_b 10mo agoPetabytes of it around. Here's a small sunset: https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/ https://www.earthdata.nasa.gov/ Would you like more, or do you plan on analyzing the first few petabytes first?
- tonymet 10mo agoHe means the original recordings. There were no digital recordings in 1880. Different apparatus, different methods. That’s the point
- dpkirchner 10mo agoThey can speak for themselves, you and I don't really know what they want, or what they think counts as "raw" data.
- tonymet 10mo agoRegardless, ascii encoding isn’t raw data. You’re making software engineer assumptions. Statistical noise is introduced 4-5 steps before the data is recorded digitally. Even after it’s digitized, more noise is introduced through recording errors and normalization. To understand the original distribution, the entire workflow needs to have been recorded
- vaylian 10mo agoWhenever you hear a politician say "carbon neutral by 2050", interrupt them. The real goal is to avoid getting too far over 1.5 degrees warming. We need to avoid reaching tipping points that will cause non-recoverable damage to the earth system. The year 2050 is meaningless. Actual global average temperatures is what should be measured.
- threethirtytwo 10mo agoA couple years back I saw articles about how we're basically less than a year from the tipping point. Then nothing. My guess is we passed the tipping point. It's inevitable by now.
- mistrial9 10mo agoBerkeley Earth berkeleyearth.org › home › global temperature report for 2023 Global Temperature Report for 2023 - Berkeley Earth February 29, 2024 - 2023 was the warmest year on Earth since direct observations began, and the first year to exceed 1.5 °C above our 1850-1900 average. ...
- AlecSchueler 10mo agoFor sure but we can still stop making it even worse.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 10mo ago2050 is not meaningless. Its close enough to feel like its achievable but far enough away that you can put off immediate action and still feel there is time to get it done. Reminds of the lyrics of the spirit of the west song: It's a ways outside of town But the distance has its uses Close enough to make the effort Far enough to make excuses. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZXgl5KxUQY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZXgl5KxUQY
- shrubby 10mo agohttps://theshovel.com.au/2021/10/26/man-announces-he-will-quit-drinking-by-2050/ https://theshovel.com.au/2021/10/26/man-announces-he-will-qu... This.
- linohh 10mo agoThird hottest year on record, so far.
- IshKebab 10mo agoUhm obviously. It would be difficult to have a year from the future on record wouldn't it?
- tonymet 10mo ago[flagged]
- foltik 10mo agoThis isn't some big conspiracy. "On record" is since recordkeeping began in 1880. https://science.nasa.gov/earth/explore/earth-indicators/global-temperature/ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/explore/earth-indicators/glob...
- tonymet 10mo agoOk, so why not just be specific? “On record” usually means since we started recording history , at least 5k years ago. And have you looked into the records? satellite surface temps and high resolution recording have not been around for very long. 1880 methods were very crude and narrowly scoped.
- genewitch 10mo agoand scientists edit the historical temperatures because of, and i hope you can see my eyeroll here "anomalous readings" - but they're overwhelmingly erroneous in only one direction. that's strange.
- tonymet 10mo agoGiven the amount of noise and normalization , I would like to see that claim better qualified. That’s what I’m calling attention to. Being more formal with the claims , and transparent about the records origins
- tonymet 10mo ago[flagged]
- tonymet 10mo ago[flagged]
- foltik 10mo agoUh, no, it’s the 3rd hottest year since 1880. You can click “Download Data” and look the table yourself. https://science.nasa.gov/earth/explore/earth-indicators/global-temperature/ https://science.nasa.gov/earth/explore/earth-indicators/glob...
- tonymet 10mo ago[flagged]
- azan_ 10mo agoIf you initially make factually wrong comment then you should at least apologize and say that you are sorry for being wrong, not keep pushing your agenda further.
- tonymet 10mo agoit’s right about the article.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- eimrine 10mo agoYour behaviour is both incorrect (you were shown at the specific place) and intentional (you have ignored that). So, I have downvoted all your posts in this topic because I have observed the efficiency of the correct words to your ignorance. Usually I am glad to argue about the climate topic, but sometimes downvotes work better.
- gwbrooks 10mo agoI can't think of a single time in history that humanity responded to a threat in a fully coordinated manner. Maybe this is the first time, but the incentive stack from the individual voter all the way up to geopolitical grand strategy argues against it. Trying to tell poor nations to remain poor -- or telling rich nations to consume less -- is a losing game. There's evidence that as societies get richer, their populations demand cleaner air, water, etc. And, as another commenter mentioned, a realistic hope is that the whole green-tech stack matures to the point where it can compete on price. We'll either make lower-carbon/lower-warming solutions work at near-market rates, in a way that allows personal and national economies to grow, or it'll just be talk for the next 50 years as well.
- IshKebab 10mo agoBanning CFCs. But that didn't require giving anything up really so it was an easier sell.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- cramforloin 10mo ago[flagged]
- dust42 10mo ago30 years ago I attended a university lecture in an economics class and the professor spoke about the economic consequences of global warming - some places will be better off and plenty of places will be worse off. There will be water shortages in some places, while heavy rainfall in others. He presented it as a given fact that the global warming is coming - and pretty much the whole audience was shocked. Finally someone asked if he really thinks that it is unavoidable. And his answer was yes, that is human nature. As long as fossil fuels are there and cheap to explore someone will use them. 30 years later it looks like he was right. Edit: the IPCC was founded in 1988 thus people started in the 70ies to understand that there will be a problem but there was a very long period of inactivity. Personally I am quite optimistic that fusion will become commercially available before 2040. And dear downvoters, dont shoot the messenger.
- linuxhansl 10mo agoWith 2024 and 2023 being 2nd and 1st resp. The last 11 years were the hottest 11 in recorded history. I don't know how more evidence we need. We are standing on the train tracks, the train is coming, and many of us say "Oh just look over there instead, we'll be fine." Meanwhile - even if you do not care about climate - there is so much money to make with renewables (production, storage, mobility, etc). China and much of the rest of the world are charging ahead, while the US wants to be a petrol state.
- RickJWagner 10mo ago[flagged]
- cabirum 10mo agoWho are "we"? China population is 4 times the US, with carbon emissions just 3 times greater, making them produce less carbon per capita.
- RickJWagner 10mo agoIf we are judging per capital emissions, Australia, Canada and 11 other countries emit more than the US. China does do better, by 10 places. There are 182 countries doing better than China. https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/ https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by...
- jph00 10mo agoObviously what matters is how much of the world’s products they produce - especially products that require high energy input. I can’t imagine why you think per capita is the appropriate statistic to compare. This has already been pointed out to you in this discussion, so it seems you are not actually engaging with the information you’re being provided with for some reason.
- 10mo ago
- miroljub 10mo agoYeah, we definitely need to put more weather stations in urban areas and remove rural ones. That's how we can reach first place every year. Being number 3 is disappointing.
- dadjoker 10mo ago[dead]
- smetannik 10mo agoThe next one probably will be even hotter
- insane_dreamer 10mo agoWow, a shocking amount of climate change denialism in this thread. Honestly what I expected from HN readership.
- defrost 10mo agoDenialism is not the majority position of the readership as a whole in my experience. It's more that such titles attract the denialists and edgelords like bees to sucrose. Lack of significant action is more a majority position, and that's unsuprising given many people struggle with how to make meaningful change as individuals or accept greater risk and reduced returns as C-suits of corporations.
- insane_dreamer 10mo agoJust came back to this and realized I had forgotten a “not”. Meant to say “not what I expected…” and I was quite surprised.
- tsoukase 10mo agoLiving in the coldest corner of my country, this is an extension of Siberia and getting hotter and hotter by the year, I amateurly confirm the global observations. Specifically I estimate the average temperature increase of the latest 3 years to be about 2-3C comparing with >20 years ago. A vital decease in heating costs with a whole month without heating is welcome. The future becomes from manageable to fate.