5 ms·
Is 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 thin
by cryptoegorophy 9mo ago
Is 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 9mo agoWhat about poor people that live in areas in the world that will become completely uninhabitable?
- coryrc 9mo 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 9mo 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 9mo ago[deleted]
- CGMthrowaway 9mo agoPerhaps they are part of the depopulation agenda.
- jandrese 9mo 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.
- quesera 9mo agoWhose politicians are you referring to?
- __MatrixMan__ 9mo agoAre you sure the whole world won't become completely uninhabitable? It's not like we have a trial earth to test this out on.
- theshrike79 9mo agoEveryone who is worried about immigration should be worried about climate change. If nothing changes large parts of India will become completely uninhabitable due to wet-bulb temperatures being lethal without artificial cooling. Those people will start moving and it won't be a 1000 or 100k people, it'll be millions looking for a place they can live in without, you know, dying.
- wat10000 9mo agoTechnologically practical? Certainly. Kick renewables and electrification into high gear. Treat it like the emergency that it is. Politically practical? Not a chance. It was already a major struggle a decade ago when the political climate was much more favorable to addressing the problem. Now, even the countries that want to do something about it are going to be more concerned about more immediate threats like being invaded. Our best hope is that green technology quickly gets to the point where it so heavily outcompetes CO2-emitting technology that the latter disappears on its own. But this will take longer than it should.
- ltbarcly3 9mo agoI'm not sure what we should do, it's very hard to determine what minimizes harm and maximizes benefits at a global scale. It's certainly not as simple as extremists would like to believe. Certainly it would be much (MUCH) less risky to slow warming as much as possible and maintain constant or slowly reducing CO2 levels. I think from the standpoint of predicting what will happen, my best guess is that people will use fossil fuels until it is economically not viable to do so. If you want hasten it at an individual level, buy solar panels and have your house disconnected from the grid until fees you pay no longer subsidize fossil fuels. Frown at people and refuse to give them positive social cues when they buy a car that isn't electric. Instead of "oh nice car" just say "it would be so cool if they had a plugin version!". Support electrification of things like heat and water heating so long as it can be powered by non-fossil sources. In the long run I think solar power, effective battery technology, and the peaking of the global population combine to cause fossil fuel usage to reduce over the next 100 years or so until CO2 levels stabilize. Lots of large CO2 emitters are already leveling off - the output is too high to sustain but at least it's no longer increasing year over year - such as from cement production. Honestly it's not much but that's what you can do, larger social movements and political action do not work when someone's decision is whether to spend $800 a month or $100 a month to heat their house. Anyone who says it does should buy a thermometer, but instead they will get a plane ticket to the next big city to run around in the street yelling at police (literally the only people paid to not care about your slogans) while nobody really notices.
- tantivy 9mo agoElectric cars are the savior of the auto industry, not of the climate. It needs to become viable for most people to get around without cars at all. The intensity of their resource consumption, both for manufacture and for infrastructure, independent of their fuel source, cannot scale up for the world population.
- SV_BubbleTime 9mo ago> Electric cars are the savior of the auto industry You should check with Ford on that. 19B write off this year
- idiotsecant 9mo agoAs with most difficult problems, this is a messy political problem, not a technical one. There is zero chance we avoid 1.5C gain. The best you can do is make life decisions for yourself to make your lifetime as comfortable for you as you can, assuming it will happen. I started doing that 5 years ago.
- chickenimprint 9mo agoThe real practical solutions are trivial, the politics are not. It's a collective action problem, where the US is one of the actors.
- shrubby 9mo agoYup. Plenty of solutions, but politicians will never make it happen. We calculated that capping personal emissions (mostly doable via peer pressure should we get this moving as normal people) to some top 1 percent 25 metric carbon ton and going plant based would get us net-zero while additionally getting rid of the zillionaire problem and adding extra 50-100 gigaton rewilding effect to the table. With no bigger than marginal effect on anyone's QOL. But we're SOL as the propaganda machines of the zillionaires keep dividing normal people to fake dichotomies.
- chickenimprint 9mo agoNo, there's really just a few select politicians standing in the way. Governments around the world have implemented tons of policies to attempt to address the crisis, but unless every country participates, it's economically suicidal. Carbon-intensive industries can simply move to the US, strengthening them, while those countries attempting to carry the burden of preventing climate change will be equally affected by looming disasters.
- shrubby 9mo agoThe same root cause everywhere . The zillionaires threatening to flee from the taxes. Annex Greenlands, Ukraines... Taking children to pedo islands. Once we'll wake up to the fact that almost every human becomes corrupt when treated with enough power we'll grok this. And provide mental health services to the zillionaires and also they'll be happier. Nobody wants the future we're getting.
- Jommi 9mo agowhy reference US here? All countries are actors here.
- pkdrollsover 9mo ago[dead]
- johannes1234321 9mo agoYes, we got to adapt, we won't cool it down and "repair" what is broken. However we can slow down the effects and try to stop the effects. So it's "only" 1.5° or whatever, not 3°, 5° or 10°. And if we raise average by 10° at least not by the years 2100, but 2200 to give time to adapt. "Adapting" means resettling people, restructuring agriculture and food production, etc. (All numbers are quite arbitrary picks, just as any goal one tried to set before)
- mempko 9mo agoLook at the degrowth movement. There are solutions but nobody, especially the leadership, are going to like them.
- CGMthrowaway 9mo agoNobody has to "like" them. The centralized command and control structure is mostly in place to just force them down everyone's throats. Once we have centralized digital currency it will be a foregone conclusion
- __MatrixMan__ 9mo agoHow will a centralized digital currency affect whether I decide to burn carbon fuels? If it gets obnoxious enough I can just use a different currency instead.
- CGMthrowaway 9mo agoThat is the point...you can't
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- __MatrixMan__ 9mo ago> Once we have centralized digital currency it will be a foregone conclusion In that case... what will be a foregone conclusion once we have a centralized digital currency?
- tmnvix 9mo agoIf only. Given how power and influence works currently, I would guess that those that have real control over these currencies would most likely use that power as they do now - to further their exploitation and pillaging of the earth with environmental considerations coming a distant second (or third, fourth, whatever...)
- 9mo ago
- cogman10 9mo agoThere are a lot of money scams out there to be sure. It's unlikely that something like carbon capture will ever significantly reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere. It's just too energy intensive. But there are a lot of practical solutions to significantly curb emissions that mostly just require regulations and taxes. Things like building out rail transport. Heavily taxing air travel. Taxing all forms of carbon emission (fuel taxes would be pretty effective). Subsidizing non-co2 emissions, pushing for electrification when possible and power generation which uses non-CO2 emission. Stop wasteful pipedreams like "clean coal". Force data centers to be better citizens. For example, make them buy the battery/solar systems to offset their consumption. Make them participate in district heating schemes. There's also some hope that even without intervention some of this will happen somewhat naturally. Solar and battery is already very cheap. Both are causing changes in the shipping and transit equations.
- parineum 9mo agoI heard about this[1] recently, essentially spurring a massive plankton bloom to capture carbon where it ends up on the sea floor and becomes future oil deposits in a few millenia. The nice thing about it is that it doesn't require global cooperation. [1]https://www.onepercentbrighter.com/p/the-no-bullshit-way-to-repair-the https://www.onepercentbrighter.com/p/the-no-bullshit-way-to-... Edit: I should probably link where I heard about it to give credit to someone who deserves it https://uncomfortableconversations.substack.com/p/the-climate-change-solution-so-crazy https://uncomfortableconversations.substack.com/p/the-climat...
- tmnvix 9mo agoI was under the impression that there have been multiple large extinction events in the past caused by excessive anaerobic decomposition underwater that led to the oceans becoming swamps and giving off nasty toxic gasses.
- parineum 9mo agoThese plankton blooms happen naturally and are part of the biosphere already. There's a whole food chain that the guy breaks down in the podcast. He was saying that this is usually kicked off by whale poop I think but because of the low numbers of whales, it happens way less now.
- themafia 9mo ago> is the ozone layer repair. Which was, stop using CFCs, and stop venting them into the atmosphere to "dispose" of them. We also stopped lighting rivers on fire for mostly the same reasons, stop dumping industrial waste in them. > I guess we should just accept it and adapt? Ocean shipping produces more pollution than most countries. There are only like 5 countries that produce more carbon than the worldwide shipping fleet. If they cared then "cheap crap from China" wouldn't exist. It's a scam. They want to monopolize the economy and they're using your environmental consciousness as the wedge to push you against your own best interests.
- chickenimprint 9mo agoOcean freight accounts for 2-3% of global emissions. It is orders of magnitude more efficient and clean than air or road freight per ton-kilometer. It's twice as efficient as rail. The ability to efficiently transport goods enables your current standard of living. A world economy without ocean freight would be minuscule and of course far more polluting, without even considering land use.
- tmnvix 9mo agoDrive less. CO2 output per person in the US (all sources including industry, etc): ~13-14,000kg Average distance driven per year per capita in the US: ~20,000km Average CO2 output of current private vehicle fleet: ~250g/km Therefore, over one third of total CO2 output per person is personal vehicle use. Considering only CO2 output due to personal choices driving has to be well over half. Most people don't - or refuse - to consider the obvious choice to take personal responsibility. Drive less.
- bfrog 9mo agoI guess returning to the office isn't so great. Pointy hair bosses rage everywhere. But beyond driving less, surely eating further down the foodchain helps as well. Plants and shellfish are efficient. Cows are not. Eat fewer burgers and a few more lentils and mussels. Unless you are RFK Jr then of course please eat lots and lots of fatty cow, tallow, butter. Go full on Atkins please and follow right behind him.
- loloquwowndueo 9mo agoThis also means two thirds of emissions are not due to vehicular emissions. Let’s tackle that first, more bang for the buck? Also - does that per capita figure include cargo? If so, how much? Does it matter if random individual takes personal Responsibility and stops driving when all those long haul trucks will still be on the road?
- tmnvix 9mo agoMy point is that in terms of personal responsibility nothing comes remotely close to driving but a vanishingly small proportion of people are willing to consider this.
- melling 9mo agoA few decades ago we explained that personal responsibility isn’t the solution. Please catch up. Why we’re having a conversation from the year 2000 now is beyond me. I also suggest reviewing the “nuclear isn’t part of the solution. Besides it takes a decade” discussion.
- f_allwein 9mo agoDon’t live like a rich person in a developed country - they’re the only ones whose co2 footprints are too high.
- oezi 9mo agoThe real solution is pricing the true cost of the externalities fairly and globally. Everything which isn't sustainable must he taxed to the degree to offset the damage. We know well that economic incentives work best and that markets are efficient to achieve optimal solutions. The core issue is just game theory to coordinate globally all players to prevent free riding.
- insane_dreamer 9mo agoHow to Avoid a Climate Disaster has a pretty good summary of the challenges and solutions. There is developing real practical solutions, and then there there is the willingness of governments, big corporations, and the general population, to implement real practical solutions. The latter is much much harder than the former.