3 ms·
Agree. It's been my position for a while that we've de facto decided to do nothing to prevent warming and we'll just live with the consequences.
by alangibson 22d ago
Agree. It's been my position for a while that we've de facto decided to do nothing to prevent warming and we'll just live with the consequences.
- FLeXMurphy 22d agoStrong agree on this. I don't think I could do nothing any harder than I already am. Could you? Could any of us?
- encomiast 22d agoSome people are clearly doing less nothing: there are activists protesting, formal political action groups, scientists doing research, etc. What isn't as clear is whether any this can actually overcome the huge social and economic structural issues to actually make a dent.
- dryd3n 22d agoWhen I was initially thinking about my personal impact to this, the first thing that came to mind is air-travel. I don't travel much, maybe once a year to see family. I have some friends who fly several times a year to "see the world", being well-traveled is a part of their personality. But I think I may be wrong on flight being a significant contribution. My guess is that we probably all contribute to this mainly through our SP500 index investments, which financially supports a number of companies that directly contribute to global warming. We're "voting with our dollars" as they say. Maybe we can all start picking individual stocks based on environmental values/promises, and less short-term gain. Somehow, I don't think it'll happen.
- CalRobert 22d agoA flight can be a few tonnes of carbon. A European might emit ten tonnes a year. It’s pretty significant. For ourselves ( electric heating, well insulated house, no beef and low meat, no car )a flight can be half the year’s emissions. The VOTE etf could be interesting to you.
- deleted 22d ago[deleted]
- CalRobert 22d agoFind a job from climate base, inclimate, etc
- kpil 22d agoThe CMIP7 scenarios were just released. AR7 is not yet completed but it's the input for it. The "worst" RCP8.5 / SSP5-8.5-style futures (coal-dominated, ~4.4–4.9 °C) are no longer treated as plausible given policy already in place, renewable cost declines, and observed emissions. The policy changes have changed the projections. Warming will continue, yes. The consequences will have to be dealt with. In some regions this will be problematic. It's still political and economical factors that determines the outcome. It's worth noting that there is a fair amount of eschatology or even apocalypticism going on. It's built into the human mind somehow.
- deleted 22d ago[deleted]
- justin66 22d ago> The "worst" RCP8.5 / SSP5-8.5-style futures (coal-dominated, ~4.4–4.9 °C) are no longer treated as plausible That's a strange way of structuring such a comment. The temperature increase and concomitant catastrophes are still on the table, what was considered the plausible worst-case scenario with regard to how early that particular milestone might be reached has (apparently) been pushed back.
- tito 22d agoI've decided that I'm going to reverse climate change and everyone is welcome to come with me to figure it out.
- defrost 22d agoIf you're going to go networking in New York, maybe see if anyone is interested in running a study / pilot project on pushing carbonated water into ultramafic rock to kick start self powered (via hydrogen) carbon capture. ~ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49605466 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49605466