5 ms·

People really don’t appreciate yet. How really bad this situation is and will be. They’re talking about 1.76°C higher temperatures next year because of this El

by Noaidi 2mo ago

People really don’t appreciate yet. How really bad this situation is and will be. They’re talking about 1.76°C higher temperatures next year because of this El Niño. Those are climate change temperatures that are not supposed to be around until 2035. So it’ll give us a sneak peek into our future. But the biggest effect and this is noted by many insurance companies now is going to be in places like India. But this is something the world has never seen and I mean that literally so I don’t expect it to be anything but really bad and you should be ready.

lukeify 2mo ago
It was inevitable we'd get to the point where climate change began substantially disrupting ecology and human livelihoods. Looks like we're ahead of schedule. People dying from extreme heatwaves, weather, and famines due to climate change has been predicted for decades at this point; and this is exactly the sort of climatic setup that will enable this to happen.
- gottorf 2mo ago
  > People dying from extreme heatwaves, weather, and famines due to climate change has been predicted for decades at this point; and this is exactly the sort of climatic setup that will enable this to happen. The rhetoric is all well and good, but if you look at the numbers according to the WMO[0], deaths from climate-related hazards have been dropping steadily in the 50-year period from 1970 to 2019, even as atmospheric CO2 went from ~326ppm to ~410ppm and the world population more than doubled. That's not a per capita decrease; it's an absolute decrease, from over 50k deaths worldwide the 70s to fewer than 20k in the 2010s. All of this is due to the increased ability of humans to deal with what the climate might throw at them, mostly due to cheap energy unlocked by fossil fuels during that time. Remember, there are no countries that are both rich and have a low per capita energy usage. Surplus energy allows humans to build the infrastructure that makes them more resilient to disasters. If I had to wager, more people will suffer and die in the coming decades from efforts to combat climate change (i.e. hamstring energy production and usage) than from climate change itself. You can already see this in the anti-air conditioning sentiment in parts of Europe. [0]: https://library.wmo.int/idurl/4/57564 https://library.wmo.int/idurl/4/57564
  - none2585 2mo ago
    [flagged]
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
  - anon7000 2mo ago
    Look, I think you made some good points, but at the same time, humans have become better at handling the climate because we’ve been able to predict it and have found solutions to certain known issues. What happens when it gets less predictable, like when certain regions get much less water for an extended period, is very much unknown. Your last claim makes no sense. Is there actually a widespread political effort to ban air conditioning or make it hard to get in Europe? That certainly isn’t the case in the US. And yet hot summers are still killer in cities which aren’t accustomed to them: that’s climate change doing the killing. Solar is just about the most abundant source of energy on the planet, and easily decentralized. Plugin solar is becoming increasingly popular and cheap, for example. I think energy production would be much more abundant and directly in control of the people if governments stopped subsidizing energy sources that need massive amounts of resources just to keep running. Why not give solar an advantage when every watt installed can just… work by itself for the next three decades? Every watt of a gas plant needs you to figure out who to buy gas from forever.
    - throwaway473825 2mo ago
      Regarding air conditioning in Europe, I suspect that there are other interests at play given that there has been zero pushback against air conditioning in cars. Air conditioning in buildings is likely viewed as a threat to gas providers as most modern cooling devices also have a heating mode that competes directly with gas heating.
      - danw1979 2mo ago
        At least here in the UK, recent revisions to the default planning rules around heat pumps (“Permitted Development” legislation) removed the restriction that an install be “used solely for heating purposes” and revised this to “not be used solely for the purpose of cooling”. The Boiler Upgrade Scheme grant also permits cooling - it’s based on the heating credentials of a unit only. So in Britain at least, installing cooling systems in private residences seems to be getting easier.
- timr 2mo ago
  [flagged]
  - defrost 2mo ago
    Your linked figure confirms that 2018 was cooler than things are today. The chapter 11 temperature over view is concerning for the consequences: The frequency and intensity of hot extremes will continue to increase and those of cold extremes will continue to decrease, at global and continental scales and in nearly all inhabited regions with increasing global warming levels. This will be the case even if global warming is stabilized at 1.5°C. Relative to present-day conditions, changes in the intensity of extremes would be at least double at 2°C, and quadruple at 3°C of global warming, compared to changes at 1.5°C of global warming. ... The frequency of hot temperature extreme events will very likely increase nonlinearly with increasing global warming, with larger percentage increases for rarer events. It's the harder to precisely predict potential tipping point changes that should really concern and motivate global changes to emissions.
    - timr 2mo ago
      > Your linked figure confirms that 2018 was cooler than things are today. So? what does that have to do with the question at hand? An 8 year change is irrelevant in the world of climate science. It's statistical noise in a system where cycles run for decades. Weather, not climate. > The chapter 11 temperature over view is concerning for the consequences: ...and then you quote the part that says exactly what I explained to you, as some kind of counter-argument? You will note that the part you quoted is, again, combining the types of extremes. They're not talking about just hot days. I honestly do not understand this need to fatalize data. You don't have a counterargument (because what I said was factually true) so your only rebuttal is to wave your hands and say that it's all scary. We can be honest -- the world is getting warmer -- and admit when the people predicting imminent death and destruction are exaggerating. This is good!
      - lukeify 2mo ago
        As the original poster you replied to, why do you think it's exaggeration to predict that people will die from increasingly strong heatwaves? This is already happening [0]. And: "For 2022, it was estimated that between 60,000 and 70,000 people in Europe died from heat (Ballester et al., 2023; Ballester et al., 2024)" It's extremely hypocritical of you to accuse me of exaggerating when your own presentation of facts is selective and not-representative of what we are seeing globally. An El Niño will only exacerbate heatwaves in some parts of the planet over the next 24 months. [0]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ukhsa-report-shows-2877-excess-deaths-caused-by-may-and-june-heatwaves https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ukhsa-report-shows-2877-e... [1]: https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/en/observatory/topics/health-impacts/heat-and-health?activeTab=0055b3cc-e3f2-4d3f-9066-a8312d9be927 https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/en/observatory/topics/he...
- timr 2mo ago
  > People dying from extreme heatwaves, weather, and famines due to climate change has been predicted for decades at this point; and this is exactly the sort of climatic setup that will enable this to happen. Yeah, people have been "predicting" it, but the fact is that this is currently mostly hyperbole, driven by bad reporting and activist exaggeration. What is happening, right now, is that winters are mostly getting warmer. Summers are getting hotter in certain places, but not at nearly the rate that cold days are decreasing -- and the evidence is weaker on a global scale. From the IPCC 6AR report, figure 11-9 shows it clearly: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure... Figure 11-2 shows it another way: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure... Even the IPCC report only gets to the "virtually certain" evidence level by combining the two claims: > The frequency and intensity of hot extremes (including heatwaves) have increased, and those of cold extremes have decreased on the global scale since 1950 (virtually certain). That's because, when you actually look at the data, it is abundantly clear that the increase in hot extremes are far less common than the decrease in cold extremes. Of course, when you take the ratio of the two, this looks worse, because the denominator is getting smaller. Chapter 11 is worth reading. You will be shocked how many of the widely reported memes about extreme weather and climate are just not supported by good data: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/chapter/chapter-11/ https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/chapter/chapter-11/ I recommend in particular going through the figures, and looking at how many of them are model predictions (nearly all), versus plots of historical data. Setting aside the debates about model quality, etc., surely we can all agree that predictions are not evidence?
  - mr_toad 2mo ago
    Go back and compare some of the earlier IPCC reports and see which bits have been left out. The worst case scenarios keep getting removed, and the best case scenarios are based on projections of CO2 emissions which are highly unrealistic. Official reports have been downplaying the impact for decades, while countries have been setting climate targets that they had no intention of achieving.
    - 2mo ago
- WheatMillington 2mo ago
  Way more people die of being exposed to the cold than exposed to the heat. So you could make a good argument that weather events save more lives than they cost by increasing the temperature of marginal zones where people otherwise freeze.
  - jdlshore 2mo ago
    > Way more people die of being exposed to the cold than exposed to the heat. I was skeptical of this claim, so I looked it up. You’re right. Globally, about 9x as many people die due to cold-related causes than heat-related causes. It’s not freezing, though, but longer-term effects like kidney failure in elderly people. [1] I’m still dubious about the argument that weather events could save lives, though, partially because climate change makes weather more extreme, not simply “more pleasant for people in colder climates.” [1] https://ourworldindata.org/part-one-how-many-people-die-from-extreme-temperatures-and-how-could-this-change-in-the-future https://ourworldindata.org/part-one-how-many-people-die-from...
nx77 2mo ago
[flagged]
- gilrain 2mo ago
  You don’t get to be unattached to the lives of others; only your own. What ugly thinking to cloth in Buddhism!
  - hackernud3s 2mo ago
    Attachment being the cause of suffering really is core to Buddhism. It's not for everybody though.
    - gilrain 2mo ago
      Then why didn’t the Buddha kill more people, thus removing the cause of their suffering? Because you can’t remove someone’s attachment to themselves… terminating them isn’t the same thing. What you must terminate can be found only in yourself, nowhere else. And it isn’t your life that you must terminate, but your self. Get off HN if you care about spirituality.
      - dyauspitr 2mo ago
        No he’s right, personal attachment is the cause for suffering. That is why you’re supposed to renounce the world. That being said, it puts great emphasis on empathy and ethical behavior so there’s no conundrum here. In simple terms the Buddha was saying if you like things you’re going to have problems. The only way to end suffering is to completely detach yourself from the world.
      - alt227 2mo ago
        > Get off HN if you care about spirituality. Being interested in tech and spiritually are not mutually exclusive things.
      - hackernud3s 2mo ago
        I think you're looking at this the wrong way. It's the goal of all religions to make death less scary, that's what they're for. Buddha is just coming at it from a different angle.
trevithick 2mo ago
Ministry for the Future ch. 1 scenario? https://www.scribd.com/document/979965270/Robinson-Kim-Stanley-Ministry-for-the-Future-2020-1 https://www.scribd.com/document/979965270/Robinson-Kim-Stanl...
pier25 2mo ago
The future will be much worse. Some effects take years or decades to manifest and we wont see them during a relatively short event like El Niño. Eg: the severe disruption of the jet stream or the collapse of the AMOC. Plus all the long term feedbacks like methane etc.
energy123 2mo ago
Cheap cooling vests distributed at scale, kept cool or "recharged" by a portable and unpluggable solar panel, seems necessary. Individual air conditioning is too expensive and most affected people need to work outside during the daytime.
- alt227 2mo ago
  The solution to climate change is definitely not more gadgets and power use.
  - zarzavat 2mo ago
    There's an inverse relationship between exposure to the effects of climate change and CO2 emitted per capita. The people who will need live preserving artificial cooling the most are exactly the people contributing the least to climate change. In any case, the effects of extreme heat on the body are the easiest part of climate change to mitigate with current technology. The hard part is the famine.
    - alt227 2mo ago
      There is also an inverse relationship between stopping/slowing climate change and making us survive it more comfortably.
alt227 2mo ago
> But this is something the world has never seen and I mean that literally Lets not forget there have been bigger and hotter events than this in local past. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1877%E2%80%931878_El_Ni%C3%B1o_event https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1877%E2%80%931878_El_Ni%C3%B1o... You may tie this in to climate change in general to prove your point, but this is a discussion about El Nino weather event and it is important to remember the current situation is not unprecedented.
- Noaidi 2mo ago
  This El Nino is expected to be worse than that based on the El Nino 3.4 temperatures we are already seeing. This is why most weather people are talking about it so much. We do not have the same data for the 1877 event that we do for the last strongest El Nino in 1997. And this one is much stronger than that by far: https://xcancel.com/BenNollWeather/status/2088649414722117871#m https://xcancel.com/BenNollWeather/status/208864941472211787...
  - alt227 2mo ago
    > expected to be worse Lets not speculate, currently there have been worse ones in the past. If this eventually becomes more extreme then yes it will become a big talking point, but it is not there yet.
    - Noaidi 2mo ago
      It’s not called speculation. It’s called the scientific extrapolation. The reason why we do this is to prevent people from dying. If we wait till it becomes extreme and we’re saddled with food shortages it’s too late. And currently , this is the worst El Niño ever recorded at this point. El Niño right now is worse than the El Niño in 1997 was at this point. Much worse. We simply don’t have these numbers for 1887.
      - alt227 2mo ago
        > This El Nino is expected to be worse > this is the worst El Niño ever recorded Consistency doesn't seem your strong point, in language as well as factually! I stand by my point, this is currently not unprecedented. You are welcome to disagree, but as you keep saying 'We dont have the numbers' then you cant be sure just as much as you are saying I cant.
throw1234567891 2mo ago
Our future is extinction regardless of what we do. It’s a matter of timescale. Plagues, wars, political unrest, asteroids, geological events on the continental scale, super volcano eruptions, poles flipping, the Earth coming closer to the Sun and then moving farther away, iron core rotation slowing down, the Sun swelling and dying. Unless we find a way to evolve into something capable of leaving this planet for good, we are going to go extinct. No carbon taxes and offsets are going to change anything. We are boiling as the proverbial frog, and everything we do is just ”feel good” measures.
- SketchySeaBeast 2mo ago
  Even if we leave the planet we're going to go extinct anyways, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to slow it down.
  - throw1234567891 2mo ago
    Said the frog in a pot. Sorry, but it’s true.
    - SketchySeaBeast 2mo ago
      I think you're missing my point though - no matter what we're walking towards extinction. You yourself are suggesting we delay matters by fleeing the planet, but it isn't stopping heat death. I'm also aware that one day I'm going to die, but that doesn't mean that hoping to live as long as possible.
      - throw1234567891 2mo ago
        I’m not missing your point. We have a different perspective at the end of the line.
        SketchySeaBeast 2mo ago
        Sure. We're all going to die some day, but I'll bet you still look before you cross the street.
futevolei 2mo ago
People still actually pay attention to global warming forecasts? Err I mean climate change. I’m not a denier, in fact I’m quite a believer though not quite 100%, prolly closer to 80-90%. I mean the climate certainly changed a lot before humans. But count me out on people predicting 1.76 degrees higher next year…

by Noaidi 2mo ago

lukeify 2mo ago

It was inevitable we'd get to the point where climate change began substantially disrupting ecology and human livelihoods. Looks like we're ahead of schedule. People dying from extreme heatwaves, weather, and famines due to climate change has been predicted for decades at this point; and this is exactly the sort of climatic setup that will enable this to happen.

gottorf 2mo ago
> People dying from extreme heatwaves, weather, and famines due to climate change has been predicted for decades at this point; and this is exactly the sort of climatic setup that will enable this to happen. The rhetoric is all well and good, but if you look at the numbers according to the WMO[0], deaths from climate-related hazards have been dropping steadily in the 50-year period from 1970 to 2019, even as atmospheric CO2 went from ~326ppm to ~410ppm and the world population more than doubled. That's not a per capita decrease; it's an absolute decrease, from over 50k deaths worldwide the 70s to fewer than 20k in the 2010s. All of this is due to the increased ability of humans to deal with what the climate might throw at them, mostly due to cheap energy unlocked by fossil fuels during that time. Remember, there are no countries that are both rich and have a low per capita energy usage. Surplus energy allows humans to build the infrastructure that makes them more resilient to disasters. If I had to wager, more people will suffer and die in the coming decades from efforts to combat climate change (i.e. hamstring energy production and usage) than from climate change itself. You can already see this in the anti-air conditioning sentiment in parts of Europe. [0]: https://library.wmo.int/idurl/4/57564 https://library.wmo.int/idurl/4/57564
- none2585 2mo ago
  [flagged]
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- anon7000 2mo ago
  Look, I think you made some good points, but at the same time, humans have become better at handling the climate because we’ve been able to predict it and have found solutions to certain known issues. What happens when it gets less predictable, like when certain regions get much less water for an extended period, is very much unknown. Your last claim makes no sense. Is there actually a widespread political effort to ban air conditioning or make it hard to get in Europe? That certainly isn’t the case in the US. And yet hot summers are still killer in cities which aren’t accustomed to them: that’s climate change doing the killing. Solar is just about the most abundant source of energy on the planet, and easily decentralized. Plugin solar is becoming increasingly popular and cheap, for example. I think energy production would be much more abundant and directly in control of the people if governments stopped subsidizing energy sources that need massive amounts of resources just to keep running. Why not give solar an advantage when every watt installed can just… work by itself for the next three decades? Every watt of a gas plant needs you to figure out who to buy gas from forever.
  - throwaway473825 2mo ago
    Regarding air conditioning in Europe, I suspect that there are other interests at play given that there has been zero pushback against air conditioning in cars. Air conditioning in buildings is likely viewed as a threat to gas providers as most modern cooling devices also have a heating mode that competes directly with gas heating.
    - danw1979 2mo ago
      At least here in the UK, recent revisions to the default planning rules around heat pumps (“Permitted Development” legislation) removed the restriction that an install be “used solely for heating purposes” and revised this to “not be used solely for the purpose of cooling”. The Boiler Upgrade Scheme grant also permits cooling - it’s based on the heating credentials of a unit only. So in Britain at least, installing cooling systems in private residences seems to be getting easier.
timr 2mo ago
[flagged]
- defrost 2mo ago
  Your linked figure confirms that 2018 was cooler than things are today. The chapter 11 temperature over view is concerning for the consequences: The frequency and intensity of hot extremes will continue to increase and those of cold extremes will continue to decrease, at global and continental scales and in nearly all inhabited regions with increasing global warming levels. This will be the case even if global warming is stabilized at 1.5°C. Relative to present-day conditions, changes in the intensity of extremes would be at least double at 2°C, and quadruple at 3°C of global warming, compared to changes at 1.5°C of global warming. ... The frequency of hot temperature extreme events will very likely increase nonlinearly with increasing global warming, with larger percentage increases for rarer events. It's the harder to precisely predict potential tipping point changes that should really concern and motivate global changes to emissions.
  - timr 2mo ago
    > Your linked figure confirms that 2018 was cooler than things are today. So? what does that have to do with the question at hand? An 8 year change is irrelevant in the world of climate science. It's statistical noise in a system where cycles run for decades. Weather, not climate. > The chapter 11 temperature over view is concerning for the consequences: ...and then you quote the part that says exactly what I explained to you, as some kind of counter-argument? You will note that the part you quoted is, again, combining the types of extremes. They're not talking about just hot days. I honestly do not understand this need to fatalize data. You don't have a counterargument (because what I said was factually true) so your only rebuttal is to wave your hands and say that it's all scary. We can be honest -- the world is getting warmer -- and admit when the people predicting imminent death and destruction are exaggerating. This is good!
    - lukeify 2mo ago
      As the original poster you replied to, why do you think it's exaggeration to predict that people will die from increasingly strong heatwaves? This is already happening [0]. And: "For 2022, it was estimated that between 60,000 and 70,000 people in Europe died from heat (Ballester et al., 2023; Ballester et al., 2024)" It's extremely hypocritical of you to accuse me of exaggerating when your own presentation of facts is selective and not-representative of what we are seeing globally. An El Niño will only exacerbate heatwaves in some parts of the planet over the next 24 months. [0]: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ukhsa-report-shows-2877-excess-deaths-caused-by-may-and-june-heatwaves https://www.gov.uk/government/news/ukhsa-report-shows-2877-e... [1]: https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/en/observatory/topics/health-impacts/heat-and-health?activeTab=0055b3cc-e3f2-4d3f-9066-a8312d9be927 https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/en/observatory/topics/he...
timr 2mo ago
> People dying from extreme heatwaves, weather, and famines due to climate change has been predicted for decades at this point; and this is exactly the sort of climatic setup that will enable this to happen. Yeah, people have been "predicting" it, but the fact is that this is currently mostly hyperbole, driven by bad reporting and activist exaggeration. What is happening, right now, is that winters are mostly getting warmer. Summers are getting hotter in certain places, but not at nearly the rate that cold days are decreasing -- and the evidence is weaker on a global scale. From the IPCC 6AR report, figure 11-9 shows it clearly: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure... Figure 11-2 shows it another way: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-11/figure... Even the IPCC report only gets to the "virtually certain" evidence level by combining the two claims: > The frequency and intensity of hot extremes (including heatwaves) have increased, and those of cold extremes have decreased on the global scale since 1950 (virtually certain). That's because, when you actually look at the data, it is abundantly clear that the increase in hot extremes are far less common than the decrease in cold extremes. Of course, when you take the ratio of the two, this looks worse, because the denominator is getting smaller. Chapter 11 is worth reading. You will be shocked how many of the widely reported memes about extreme weather and climate are just not supported by good data: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/chapter/chapter-11/ https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/chapter/chapter-11/ I recommend in particular going through the figures, and looking at how many of them are model predictions (nearly all), versus plots of historical data. Setting aside the debates about model quality, etc., surely we can all agree that predictions are not evidence?
- mr_toad 2mo ago
  Go back and compare some of the earlier IPCC reports and see which bits have been left out. The worst case scenarios keep getting removed, and the best case scenarios are based on projections of CO2 emissions which are highly unrealistic. Official reports have been downplaying the impact for decades, while countries have been setting climate targets that they had no intention of achieving.
  - 2mo ago
WheatMillington 2mo ago
Way more people die of being exposed to the cold than exposed to the heat. So you could make a good argument that weather events save more lives than they cost by increasing the temperature of marginal zones where people otherwise freeze.
- jdlshore 2mo ago
  > Way more people die of being exposed to the cold than exposed to the heat. I was skeptical of this claim, so I looked it up. You’re right. Globally, about 9x as many people die due to cold-related causes than heat-related causes. It’s not freezing, though, but longer-term effects like kidney failure in elderly people. [1] I’m still dubious about the argument that weather events could save lives, though, partially because climate change makes weather more extreme, not simply “more pleasant for people in colder climates.” [1] https://ourworldindata.org/part-one-how-many-people-die-from-extreme-temperatures-and-how-could-this-change-in-the-future https://ourworldindata.org/part-one-how-many-people-die-from...

nx77 2mo ago

[flagged]

gilrain 2mo ago
You don’t get to be unattached to the lives of others; only your own. What ugly thinking to cloth in Buddhism!
- hackernud3s 2mo ago
  Attachment being the cause of suffering really is core to Buddhism. It's not for everybody though.
  - gilrain 2mo ago
    Then why didn’t the Buddha kill more people, thus removing the cause of their suffering? Because you can’t remove someone’s attachment to themselves… terminating them isn’t the same thing. What you must terminate can be found only in yourself, nowhere else. And it isn’t your life that you must terminate, but your self. Get off HN if you care about spirituality.
    - dyauspitr 2mo ago
      No he’s right, personal attachment is the cause for suffering. That is why you’re supposed to renounce the world. That being said, it puts great emphasis on empathy and ethical behavior so there’s no conundrum here. In simple terms the Buddha was saying if you like things you’re going to have problems. The only way to end suffering is to completely detach yourself from the world.
    - alt227 2mo ago
      > Get off HN if you care about spirituality. Being interested in tech and spiritually are not mutually exclusive things.
    - hackernud3s 2mo ago
      I think you're looking at this the wrong way. It's the goal of all religions to make death less scary, that's what they're for. Buddha is just coming at it from a different angle.

trevithick 2mo ago

Ministry for the Future ch. 1 scenario? https://www.scribd.com/document/979965270/Robinson-Kim-Stanley-Ministry-for-the-Future-2020-1 https://www.scribd.com/document/979965270/Robinson-Kim-Stanl...

pier25 2mo ago

The future will be much worse. Some effects take years or decades to manifest and we wont see them during a relatively short event like El Niño. Eg: the severe disruption of the jet stream or the collapse of the AMOC. Plus all the long term feedbacks like methane etc.

energy123 2mo ago

Cheap cooling vests distributed at scale, kept cool or "recharged" by a portable and unpluggable solar panel, seems necessary. Individual air conditioning is too expensive and most affected people need to work outside during the daytime.

alt227 2mo ago
The solution to climate change is definitely not more gadgets and power use.
- zarzavat 2mo ago
  There's an inverse relationship between exposure to the effects of climate change and CO2 emitted per capita. The people who will need live preserving artificial cooling the most are exactly the people contributing the least to climate change. In any case, the effects of extreme heat on the body are the easiest part of climate change to mitigate with current technology. The hard part is the famine.
  - alt227 2mo ago
    There is also an inverse relationship between stopping/slowing climate change and making us survive it more comfortably.

alt227 2mo ago

> But this is something the world has never seen and I mean that literally Lets not forget there have been bigger and hotter events than this in local past. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1877%E2%80%931878_El_Ni%C3%B1o_event https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1877%E2%80%931878_El_Ni%C3%B1o... You may tie this in to climate change in general to prove your point, but this is a discussion about El Nino weather event and it is important to remember the current situation is not unprecedented.

Noaidi 2mo ago
This El Nino is expected to be worse than that based on the El Nino 3.4 temperatures we are already seeing. This is why most weather people are talking about it so much. We do not have the same data for the 1877 event that we do for the last strongest El Nino in 1997. And this one is much stronger than that by far: https://xcancel.com/BenNollWeather/status/2088649414722117871#m https://xcancel.com/BenNollWeather/status/208864941472211787...
- alt227 2mo ago
  > expected to be worse Lets not speculate, currently there have been worse ones in the past. If this eventually becomes more extreme then yes it will become a big talking point, but it is not there yet.
  - Noaidi 2mo ago
    It’s not called speculation. It’s called the scientific extrapolation. The reason why we do this is to prevent people from dying. If we wait till it becomes extreme and we’re saddled with food shortages it’s too late. And currently , this is the worst El Niño ever recorded at this point. El Niño right now is worse than the El Niño in 1997 was at this point. Much worse. We simply don’t have these numbers for 1887.
    - alt227 2mo ago
      > This El Nino is expected to be worse > this is the worst El Niño ever recorded Consistency doesn't seem your strong point, in language as well as factually! I stand by my point, this is currently not unprecedented. You are welcome to disagree, but as you keep saying 'We dont have the numbers' then you cant be sure just as much as you are saying I cant.

throw1234567891 2mo ago

Our future is extinction regardless of what we do. It’s a matter of timescale. Plagues, wars, political unrest, asteroids, geological events on the continental scale, super volcano eruptions, poles flipping, the Earth coming closer to the Sun and then moving farther away, iron core rotation slowing down, the Sun swelling and dying. Unless we find a way to evolve into something capable of leaving this planet for good, we are going to go extinct. No carbon taxes and offsets are going to change anything. We are boiling as the proverbial frog, and everything we do is just ”feel good” measures.

SketchySeaBeast 2mo ago
Even if we leave the planet we're going to go extinct anyways, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to slow it down.
- throw1234567891 2mo ago
  Said the frog in a pot. Sorry, but it’s true.
  - SketchySeaBeast 2mo ago
    I think you're missing my point though - no matter what we're walking towards extinction. You yourself are suggesting we delay matters by fleeing the planet, but it isn't stopping heat death. I'm also aware that one day I'm going to die, but that doesn't mean that hoping to live as long as possible.
    - throw1234567891 2mo ago
      I’m not missing your point. We have a different perspective at the end of the line.
      - SketchySeaBeast 2mo ago
        Sure. We're all going to die some day, but I'll bet you still look before you cross the street.

futevolei 2mo ago

People still actually pay attention to global warming forecasts? Err I mean climate change. I’m not a denier, in fact I’m quite a believer though not quite 100%, prolly closer to 80-90%. I mean the climate certainly changed a lot before humans. But count me out on people predicting 1.76 degrees higher next year…