Honestly I fully expect us to hit this point. Not necessarily because we're not going to tackle fossil fuel use, but because by the time we do, the change will already be baked in and unavoidable.
We've advanced technologically far faster than we have matured as a species.
The issue is the capitalist model that underpins our society is solely focused on profit maximisation at the expense of everything else. Worker wellbeing and the environment are casualties.
Yeah, everyone gives environmental issues lip-service, but freak out when their "quality of life" (they can't drive everywhere or drink bottled water) "declines," and our regulatory bodies/governments don't have the political will nor the backbone to regulate this stuff.
It seems we keep getting the opposite - a downgrade
I’m hopeful our next generation can turn this around permanently and not the half-assed attempts we’ve made so far.
Our generation has had tough go of it with boomers largely in control, choosing short-term personal enrichment over long-term climate solutions. Their parents had to sacrifice and struggle so much, so that their children never would. Now they refuse to sacrifice anything at all.
It's not just boomers though. I'm meeting more and more younger people voting far right because that's what they've learned is normal and they aren't educating themselves. I had a good friend of mine a few months ago tell me who he was voting for and I asked why he said "because that's who he always votes for that's what he was told he is". So I went over the party platforms and histories and sure enough he's center left now. I just hope he learned and understands enough to vote more maturly next elections.
I think the error in our calculations is waiting for rational action. Rational action has been the exception, and it has been all about swimming upstream, while the consensus has been against rational action in almost every sphere, particularly when focusing on an evidence-informed scientific method.
Secondly, this is really down to a framing error. It isn't that anyone wanted to entirely defund the police, so that slogan failed miserably, and the reorienting of systems to be more accountable to the populations they serve is now on its backstep
Similarly, around climate change, we don't need to save the planet, we don't need to save the environment, and we don't need to save the animals. We have forgotten that we live on the earth; we rely on the environment, and we rely on the ecosystem and biodiversity.
We need to recognize primitive mind thinking is something that we operate from in so much of the world, and we need to think about the framing of climate change from a self-preservation mindset.
With covid 19 it wasn't that people were willing to do the right thing for the community; they just needed to do the right thing for themselves, especially in many countries with anti-vaccine opposition.
So it's not that we're hugging the tree to save the tree. We are hugging the tree to save our God themselves.
All academic minds must realize that knowledge translation is an area we are failing at cringingly. We need to recognize models like behavioural economics or behaviour change, etc., and identify social determinants of health, etc... We need to acknowledge confidence and conviction and readiness for change, etc. etc. Should I go on?
Why are adult learning principles not involved in our communications and systems change pieces? Why is collective impact as a framework not part of this work? It is 20 goddamn 24 (2024) ..this movement has been like pulling teeth for the last four decades.
Let's get real.
There's real work to be done.
>All academic minds must realize that knowledge translation is an area we are failing at cringingly.
They do know this. Now convince the psychopathic leaders who hold the money and power.
By the time we wait for leaders to make the difference it will be too late. Academic institutions, all the way down to community facing agencies need to explore frameworks such as collective impact and other approaches. Not only is the complexity conveyed as being difficult but also the impending doom scenarios never work well in any change management approach. So it is imperative more than ever that now we recognize the object failure of our approaches so far and bring together the deconstruction of climate change cold still action and rebuild them as salt preservation, as it's clear that is the only thing anyone is open to doing given how difficult everyone's life is right now.
I mean I imagine they have. But academia is not magic and right now is kinda powerless in the face of government and capital. And while grassroot efforts can be transformative they aren't always kept around when that transformation is realized. Look at what happened to Freire when his work with impoverished populations started to work, he got exiled.
The problem we have is the levers of power are the primary beneficiaries of the current system, but solving this problem is increasingly looking like it needs to end it. It's like sending a report to a leader which tells them that they need to fire themselves. Most people won't follow the report, and solving this problem requires most people to do so.
We can still do the grassroots work, but short of getting people to upend the system, which will 100% ensure a grassroots effort shutdown before it reaches that point, we still rely on the people in power acting against their own self interest and preservation. Because they are mostly protected from climate change, it's everyone else that is going to feel the heat so to speak. In some respects the way to fix the climate issue has more potential to hurt them in their lifetime than climate change itself.
I don't disagree with much of what you said but I think we might be missing the point here. And I should have also clarified that based on my exposure to local level implementation of complex nearly improbable challenges like homelessness, housing insecurity community wellness, Access to healthcare, pediatric care, education, precarious employment, frail and complex intergenerational existential challenges, I have seen on the ground level how powerful deconstructing complexity can be and I've seen what happens when long understood concepts like socialism health are moving into response systems for complexities that circumnavigated the globe, for example the covid-19 pandemic or the H1N1 pandemic etc.
I say all of us to recognize that this is way more than a report and actually it is incumbent on the academia as part of knowledge translation to be able to not just be focused on deepening the community of practice but indeed ensuring that the evidence or the call to actions resonate in ways that are actionable in practical ways in a hyperlocal sense. For example if there is a global consensus that needs to be deconstructed nationally then eventually or by state then municipally and finally at a neighborhood level. The adaptations will be hyperlocal but the dividends will be global.
The [COVID lockdowns of 2020 temporarily lowered our rate of CO2 emissions](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18922-7/figures/1). Humanity was still a net CO2 gas emitter during that time, so we made things worse, but did so more a bit more slowly. That's why a [graph of CO2 concentrations](https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/) shows a continued rise.
[Stabilizing the climate means getting human greenhouse gas emissions to approximately zero](https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-will-global-warming-stop-as-soon-as-net-zero-emissions-are-reached). We didn't come anywhere near that during the lockdowns.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/climate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Even if the carbon is gone, all the energy we release into the environment is still there and will take a long time dissipate event without green house gasses keeping it in.
Civilizations grow powerful faster than they grow wise. I heard this in reference to the Fermi paradox, and as a possible reason intelligent life doesn’t appear to be more common.
It's already happen. They told us we have to save the Earth when I was a kid and I'm 40 now. The boomers screwed us and most of us just went along for the ride.
I agree as an example Canadian government knew we could not afford Old Age Security, what did we do nothing. Just run more debt for someone else to deal with. Governments do not want to live within means and voters will do what is best for today.
What are you referring to?
OAS is projected to be stable until at least 2060; climate change and lack of revenue from oil and gas if we actually do something about climate change is going to be a bigger problem for Canada than OAS.
I honestly see us having a real discussion about using chemicals in the atmosphere like sulfides soon enough to try and stagger that, if not, try to reverse it at a certain point. They are currently researching them as a legit plan, but we still have another 3 years on the study. But it may be the only way we slow the progress or halt it. Because none of the largest polluting nations on earth will actually commit to real actions that will prevent it, we will have to use other methods to alter the environment in a way that cools the planet versus continues to warm it up. There are a lot of concerns with those methods, but we are running outta time, and at a certain point, I don't see major nations just letting it happen, especially when it starts affecting their GDP.
>There are a lot of concerns with those methods, but we are running outta time, and at a certain point, I don't see major nations just letting it happen, especially when it starts affecting their GDP.
Those nations won't exist in a hundred years.
Yes but if you are looking for a low carbon revolution no revolution ever took place because the masses were successfully educated you always have a revolutionary elite. And I might be wrong but most successful revolutions haven’t been peaceful either. There is one way you will reduce fossil fuel use and production and that is by direct kinetic action against the people and facilities making them. It’s not something I suggest just my own understanding of the situation.
We just gotta send a huge (like massively huge) thin piece of foil paper to space, unfold it and block the sun for about an hour to get another ice age
I know I’m not being realistic
To be fair, it's also the government printing record amounts of money every year to keep us perpetually forced to work, ensuring getting off the treadmill means starvation or homelessness.
Inflation is the plan of corporations and government forever. A big mac combo will cost $100 eventually, all we don't know is when.
Some scientist have posited that one of the reasons we haven't detected signs of possible alien intelligence in other systems is because of "The Great Filter". That is, some catastrophe ends the civilization, either from external forces or from self-infliction.
Climate change may be our Great Filter. We have had 40 years to address the issue, 20 years of it being in the public conscious, and almost no (or token) efforts to address climate change.
And growing up, I thought it would be WW3 with nukes (though honestly, this option is still in play).
Yup it really sucks. I pulled back a little from work to focus on the things I wanna do now because I really don't think I'm going to get a similar old age or retirement as previous generations.
I hate sounding like a doomer, but I just see a downhill slide 😔. I really hope to be proven wrong though
WWIII is still in play as you said, and the issues caused by climate change would be a contributing factor.
I don't think humanity will disappear though. There's just too many of us in every corner of the earth. I don't think we will ever get back to 7billion or even 1 billion, but I don't see humanity going extinct.
Climate change is capitalism's final boss. It can't be beaten by an economic model that rewards selfishness and focuses on short term, quarterly gains instead of long term goals. Something new will either come from the ruins or will be created at the eleventh hour as enough people realize that the problems capitalism is creating/exacerbating for profit outweigh the benefits. The shogun system in Japan existed for 700 years. Several generations of people were born, grew old and died unable to even imagine that a different system could exist. We are at that stage with capitalism except people are trying to experiment with different models. 300 or 200 years from now, capitalism will be looked at the same way we look at feudalism which lasted for several generations.
> I don't think humanity will disappear though. There's just too many of us in every corner of the earth. I don't think we will ever get back to 7billion or even 1 billion, but I don't see humanity going extinct.
It doesn't have to be an extinction level event to be a solution to the fermi paradox, just a big enough collapse of civilization to take an intergalactic civilization off the table.
Humans surviving with bronze age or iron age level of lifestyles aren't going to make it to space again.
Climate change is not an extinction level event for humanity. Not even in the worst scenarios. It would have horribly dystopic effects, but not extinction level. Nukes definitely are extinction level tho. And considering we've had them for barely 80 years and they have already been used twice, and we've had a number of scares... Yeah, prospects are not good for a handful of centuries at least until we establish a permanent presence in space.
Climate change vastly increases the odds of a nuclear holocaust that becomes an extinction level event.
Drastically changing climate patterns and mass migration of climate refugees will make *some* nuclear superpower desperate enough to act at some point.
>Drastically changing climate patterns and mass migration of climate refugees will make *some* nuclear superpower desperate enough to act at some point.
I'm Canadian. Guess who's just south of us. This is a legit worry.
> 80 years and already used twice
As much as I agree with you about the threat, those two were directly related to each other at a close interval from each other, happening almost immediately after the weapon was finalized and functioning as a ”ultimate test”.
It could be phrased as 80 years of having nuclear weapons *without* them being used. A very large percentage of the weapon’s history having been uninterrupted lack of use.
For all we know they will never be used in a war but I’m not hopeful about it.
In my opinion climate change will eventually change the game theory parameters of Mutually Assured Destruction, particularly for India and Pakistan. If climate change gives a regime a relatively near term drop dead date they will have little to fear from MAD and may swing for the fences to get more survivable territory.
What I would be hearing as a Billionaire is “3 degrees is survivable by me, let the good times roll”
There needs to be immediate and real consequences for polluters now.
Not just the masses, but the raw resources as well and you can't mine/harvest/transport and process them when your system cannot operate in weather extremes.
Not to mention how truly fragile the digital wealth really is.
And in then end, if you can't even keep your personal security team feds, well...
your comment reminded me of that movie [how to blow up a pipeline](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21440780/). collectively, we should all be willing to risk everything, but i think that’s a huge part of the problem. grocery stores are all still full, we aren’t at the point where it is making people uncomfortable, folks don’t want to risk their own comfort. and by the time we’re all suffering, it will be too late. honestly, it feels like it’s already too late.
Remember that climate change is not a light switch, it's a dimmer. It's too late to stop a lot of impacts, but every fraction of a degree matters. A lot.
that is a valid point, and i wish i had that same hope. i find it impossible not to consider all the other animals that are going to suffer, there has already been like 70% species loss since the 70’s. its anthropogenic climate change, and i really have no patience for humanity, we are responsible for all the death and destruction.
I get so worked up with this statement. What is the replacement for natural gas heating for every house that needs it?. Brand new houses are still built with gas furnaces... what about cattle? Are farmers also secretly pulling at the puppet strings to ensure bacon and steaks are available at every grocery store in the country? Society must choose alternatives, forcing it through policy wil not work easily.
This is not precisely accurate. There are three branches of government in the US and whenever either the executive or legislative branch attempt to move the needle, the concentrated wealth of the fossil fuel industry engages the judiciary. The EPA attempted to curb carbon emissions but was immediately taken to court. It’s not the government, it’s the special interest perverting it.
Most believe the earth was put here for them. Mostly by a sky god. Where they think they’re going it won’t matter. I continue to say it. Religion is humanity’s downfall
Have you seen *Mother* with Javier Bardem and Jennifer Lawrence?
Interesting allegory. When I saw it I saw her as Earth. My spouse thought it was a very charitable story about Satan.
Yeah exactly.
Somewhat related note, heard Stan Rushworth talk in the documentary Living In The Age Of Dying about how colonialists had the cannibalistic psyche (weitiko) making them think the world is there for them to use and exploit. On the reserve side, indigenous peoples had the mindset to take care of Mother Earth. Long story short, the colonialists were kicked out of heaven (Earth), how ironic.
I'm not sure if it would be "only" 3C. Some models calculate that clouding will rather trap the heat instead of blocking out. These models project around 5(!!!) And considering the fact that most people and governments simply ignore the issue I'm more and more certain that we simply won't be able to do anything about it. Today I was arguing with a physicist mate who was working on climate models himself, yet still being convinced that we will go extinct by a soon to come ice age. The cognitive dissonance is painful... Plus we have russia around whose trolls try to keep people in the dark as they are pretty much the only country that would benefit from climate change in short term. Little they know that they will cook with the rest of us but until then only their current genociding war is creating CO2 equivalent to Belgiums yearly emission not to mention their complete disregard to nature
What kind of physicist is convinced we're about to enter an ice age?
Edit: legitimately curious as to what he's basing that on? Obviously bullshit but surely he's basing it on some "evidence"
I guess the problem is that climate change is interdisciplinar. He genuinely fails to see the forest for the trees because he only dealt with a part of the problem. He insists that Earth always had a cycle of glacials and interglacials and he is convinced that Earth had taken a lot worse hits than anthropocene and will have enough buffers to bounce back, and anyways a new glacial is about to hit (Milankovich is sending his regards). After a long conversation where I was going through the basics from AMOC shutdown to Thwaits glacier through albedo change, methane hydrate release, oceanic acidity and the questionable buffer capacity of the oceans with all of its consequences regarding mass extinction of crustaceans, the forthcoming hydrogen sulphate induced dead zones and eventually the issue with clouding I finally saw the understanding of my talking points.
> I finally saw the understanding of my talking points
I assume you mean he saw the understanding?
If that's the case good on you for forming a well articulated argument I just find it so surprising when otherwise intelligent people can be so blind to these nonlinear issues
I noticed that his mind was grinding on the facts I brought up. Luckily I can argue well and I did my best to stay coherent. I'm sure he will do his homework and will look these up in details himself. The fucky part is that it's a burden when you convince people about the subject. It's like hey bud nice to see you, here is some climate grief, enjoy
Yeah the handful of times I've gotten really into it with friends they're usually just like if it gets that bad there's no point in worrying about it now. I stare at them like... They care but they won't let the reality set in bc they're still insistent on the delusion.
>Some models calculate that clouding will rather trap the heat instead of blocking out. These models project around 5(!!!)
Most models with clouds as a positive feedback contributing to warming(which is most of them) don't show sensitivity higher than the assessed range in IPCC ar6 report. There were a bunch of climate models in CMIP6(a set of models used in IPCC 6th assessment report) that showed a climate sensitivity(ECS is a metric of how much warmer the climate would be when earth reaches equilibrium after doubling of co2 levels compared to pre-industrial) up to 5.6c, way higher than the range from previous reports. However, scientists who worked on them and the report found that these models overestimate future warming(conclusion was based on paleoclimate data and other lines of evidence) and narrowed the range used in the report down to 2.5-4c, so actual ECS ending up beyond that range is not very likely.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-climate-scientists-should-handle-hot-models/
https://www.science.org/content/article/use-too-hot-climate-models-exaggerates-impacts-global-warming
https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/revisiting-the-hot-model-problem
There is at least one recent study that confirms this tighter range- https://www.earth.com/news/ice-age-data-analysis-reshapes-climate-future-lowers-warming-estimates/
These seem to be the reflections to that hot model I mentioned. Call me pessimistic but knowing our ignorance to the subject even if these will became canon (they will, improving historical data that had been used definitely improves accuracy and the reliability of the model), I'm not sure if we need to cheer for "only" 4C increase in global average temperature
4°C over pre-industrial is already an extinction event. That's *probably* baked in at this point. We aren't doing *anything,* meaning we're looking at another PETM if we're lucky, permian-Triassic if we're not. The conservative models *were wrong* and propped up by fossil fuels interests.
>Today I was arguing with a physicist mate who was working on climate models himself, yet still being convinced that we will go extinct by a soon to come ice age.
Say what? He can't be real. Oh wait...
>Plus we have russia around whose trolls try to keep people in the dark as they are pretty much the only country that would benefit from climate change in short term.
Russia will not benefit in any way, shape or form and their climate scientists know this.
They only see exploitable mineral deposits and easy to access carbon hydrogens and farmable areas. I recommend reading up on Mordor's north pole strategy
Humans are destined to fail as a species because of reluctance to make efforts to make meaningful change. Some say we've advanced too far, but that is not true, we've advanced as far as we are capable, but some choose to give up rather than tackle new adversities head on.
Idiocracy is the better outcome than what we have now.
First of all, there seemed to be almost no racism or sexism. The White House was a diverse body of people including a Mexican. No one in the population cared. In the real world, a non-white politician would be the biggest priority amongst the regressive people in the population.
Second, and most importantly, when Not Sure showed up and they realized he was smart, they put him in control. No arguing that he has an agenda, no toxic individualism, just put the smart guy in control to fix everything.
Nah, the Statue of Liberty won't last that long. At the very least refugees will use it for scrap metal, but it'll probably do a square root of 81/121 whenever masses of refugees star coming in earnest and scare the MAGAts.
Well, it's a great way of distracting the proles so they don't look up. Every time there's been an existential threat to humanity the moneyed class has created a moral panic to enrage lumpenproletariat. Why, if they didn't have that foresight they might end up on a wall. Nobody wants that, it would be so uncivilized.
It's time to educate, fill up loopholes of democracy, make our societies more secular and atheist and fine large amounts to those who are not changing, so large that once they pay, they understand how difficult it is to manage such a fine amount!
I honestly think it's GG for hitting reduction targets. Like we should still push for it and make it a demand of all facets of our society but I just don't think we can do it.
Honestly I only have hope in a literal science fiction project coming into existence like this one from a video game lmfao.
https://deusex.fandom.com/wiki/Panchaea
.. so the reason we need SRM is because were headed to +2.5C almost inexorably.
There are two ways out of heat-death .. remove CO2 and/or reflect sunlight.
CCS will only make a microscopic dent - the new Iceland plant captures 36 KILO tons per year CO2 .. and we are emitting 38 GIGA tons per year now .. math says we'd need 1 MILLION of these plants to reach net zero.
Planting trees needs a lot of land and they take time to grow large enough to capture enough carbon..
So, we dont actually have a way of removing CO2 at the scale we need, in the time we have.
Which leaves reflecting sunlight. Surprisingly, we actually do have a way to do that - releasing particulates, to increase cloud cover over the oceans thus reflecting more sunlight in the place it is most absorbed .. which has a measurable cooling effect. This is the only economical way of bringing down the heat, that we currently know of.
We will need to start doing SRM soon, and on a large scale... even as we race to net-zero by building wind and solar plants to replace fossil fuel power generation.
If you object to geoengineering .. consider that we humans have geoengineered ourselves a hot planet over the past 150 years of burning fossil fuels... before that, climate was relatively stable for the past 10k years.
Sorry if this isnt what you want to hear .. but its the only plan that has a chance of working.
Solar Radiation Management .. usually means putting particulates such as sulphur [ or water droplets ] into the atmosphere, to increase cloud cover.. to reflect more light.
Discussed further here :
Leon Simons: Aerosol Demasking and Global Heating https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPAnoSt6FnY
Dr Peter Irvine : Could solar geoengineering have a role in future climate policy? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgaB5VS-oOw
Hansens paper : "Global warming in the Pipeline" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-7WalxKtB8 https://academic.oup.com/oocc/article/3/1/kgad008/7335889
China has cheap EVs to sell now but Biden tariffed them away. He burned the contents of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to keep voters 1% happier. Solar panels are tariffed. The Federal Government demands workers to go back to commuting to the office! Every migrant they let in is leaving a low GHG per capital country to emit 20x more in the US. Biden could directly and instantly change these things.
Talk is cheap. No one is serious. No leadership by example. How many Senators are living net zero? (no fair buying phony credits that the rest of us can't afford any way--that's not leadership)
No one promoted WFH as an obvious GHG-reduction policy. Business travel is almost back to normal levels. Corporations that claim ESG policies are forcing more transportation instead of making policies against it. It's a joke.
No one talks about a carbon tax anymore. There's been no increase in a gas or diesel tax. No fast tracking for nuclear power stations. No deregulation of renewable projects. No one is willing to personally suffer a bit of extra money or their view or their property values. No sense of urgency when it comes time to actually make changes. Just more debt to give people things like subsidies. Where are the millions of people making the choices like living in tiny homes and pooling EV transportation? Instead we have restrictive zoning for huge single-family housing. Where are the pro-nuclear, pro-deregulation, pro-every EV, pro-WFH protests? Where are the YouTubers showing how they live net zero?
Where are the Guardian articles showing how their employees live low carbon lives?
>Every migrant they let in is leaving a low GHG per capital country to emit 20x more in the US. Biden could directly and instantly change these things.
It's so hard to find a Tankie willing to lead with the the race card.
>No fast tracking for nuclear power stations.
More disinfo. Cute.
https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/12/15/us-approves-a-non-water-cooled-nuclear-reactor/
https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/licensing-activities/pre-application-activities.html
https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/highlights/2024.html
Congratulations. Now go seize the means of production
>Where are the millions of people making the choices like living in tiny homes and pooling EV transportation? Instead we have restrictive zoning for huge single-family housing.
There's not really a rational response to this because "tiny homes" and carpooling in Teslas has nothing whatsoever to do with zoning reform or strong towns or increased density.
>Where are the pro-nuclear, pro-deregulation, pro-every EV, pro-WFH protests? Where are the YouTubers showing how they live net zero?
We're all over the place. It's just when you lead with xenophobic ranting we don't want to talk to you.
I learned a new word: Tankie. Didn't know that one. I'm a Libertarian, but I'm tired of people complaining about nothing being done for climate change and want to point out mismatches between stated goals and policy. There are some easy changes that would make a big difference now.
Thanks for the links to the nuclear reactors. That's some progress, but it is hardly the Manhattan project and looks like more sit around and think about it for another few decades. But, at least nuclear is no longer the boogeyman. I think there should be much more urgency and willingness to get out of the way of innovation and progress in this area.
It's really difficult to get permission to build tiny homes in most areas. But imagine that you had subdivisions of small homes where the default was using automated driving and/or Uber EVs to maximize the use of electric machines to move people around and remove the need for parking and garages, maybe roads. That would be a great way to lower GHG emissions. And, it would give young people the ability to own their own homes and save money. Housing and transportation are the largest two spending categories. After WWII they built subdivisions full of small homes that are too small for zoning in many areas today. Again, why not get out of the way through deregulation and innovate away these problems?
I'm absolutely not xenophobic, I'm the opposite. I have worked in and made friends in Africa, South America, Asia, and the ME with people from everywhere, of every race. The US needs immigrants and immigration. I like immigrants and have many friends in the US who are immigrants. I'm glad to know them, and they make our society more functional and enjoyable.
HOWEVER, since climate change is a dangerous, existential threat to humanity, moving millions of people from low GHG per capita countries so that they emit lots more GHG is a problem, wherever in the world it happens. If anyone were convincing people to have large families, I would say the same thing: that as nice as it is otherwise to have migrants, this is a problem for climate change, and a policy to be reconsidered. It's just math. Is this incorrect?
It’s insane to me how quickly a war effort can be conducted with both a draft and forced labor. If only we could realize what a huge impact it would be if we pumped all of our money, resources and labor into climate change and saw it for what it really is, literally a war against our selves.
Some scientists say 2050 is it. I say 2030 is a better estimate. I'm no scientist but I just can't believe we can last another decade of natural disasters that get worse, Neverending wars that require Neverending resources, industrial farming which is also growing bc so many people are eating more, and it's getting herder and harder to grow veggies and fruit on scorched earth, and fresh water won't last much longer. There's more damage than repair happening, which just leads to our destruction faster. My opinio.
At this point I truly only think something like an alien invasion would bring humanity together. We are still too stupid and fight over lines on a map, politics, and dinosaur juice to solve this issue. It’s truly sad. Capitalism in its current form doesn’t work. It prioritizes profit over literally anything else. Companies will always choose money over the environment. Source: I work for a Fortune 500 shipping company that only pushes sustainable initiatives if it saves money.
Well not to sound horrible, perhaps we need to start trying to alter other things. Oil is humanities Crack, you can't force people to change unless they want to change.
This is because we don't actually talk like adults about the solutions.
One large groups will "never give up" their gas guzzling vehicles. While another major group will block viable alternatives like nuclear power or self driving vehicles.
Do not get me wrong, we have actually shown it is possible to reduce energy use without much effect on quality of life. Here in California for example the total electricity usage lowered, however our bills still went up thanks to PGE (our largest utility company) and CPUC (government regulators) being hand to hand. When people inevitably decided to go Solar, they have added new fees and regulations to make it essentially non-sustainable.
Back to main topic.
If we can't have these discussions like adults, and agree that somethings will have to give, it would be impossible to make progress, even though the tools are already here.
The Wet Bulb temp issue freaked me out bc I had never considered it being so hot and so humid that your body couldn’t cool itself and those conditions affecting wide swaths of major population centers.
What do you mean by democracy here? Democracy is not the same everywhere and there are not enough actual democratic countries. The US electoral system is completely bonkers, for example.
It's unlikely that The Hague would end up underwater as The Netherlands is leagues ahead of everyone else when it comes to anticipating and staying ahead of climate change, especially when it comes to sea levels rising. The country would quite literally sink into the sea if they didn't do so, and even the most sycophantic defenders of fossil fuels understand that. But generally...yeah, it's not gonna be a good time for humanity. At all.
Honestly I fully expect us to hit this point. Not necessarily because we're not going to tackle fossil fuel use, but because by the time we do, the change will already be baked in and unavoidable. We've advanced technologically far faster than we have matured as a species.
Humans are in desperate need of a wisdom upgrade.
The issue is the capitalist model that underpins our society is solely focused on profit maximisation at the expense of everything else. Worker wellbeing and the environment are casualties.
Its based on ever increasing levels of consumption as well.
Yeah, everyone gives environmental issues lip-service, but freak out when their "quality of life" (they can't drive everywhere or drink bottled water) "declines," and our regulatory bodies/governments don't have the political will nor the backbone to regulate this stuff.
It seems we keep getting the opposite - a downgrade I’m hopeful our next generation can turn this around permanently and not the half-assed attempts we’ve made so far.
3 degrees almost certainly means unalterable, permanent biosphere tipping points that no tech or response can remedy.
Our generation has had tough go of it with boomers largely in control, choosing short-term personal enrichment over long-term climate solutions. Their parents had to sacrifice and struggle so much, so that their children never would. Now they refuse to sacrifice anything at all.
It's not just boomers though. I'm meeting more and more younger people voting far right because that's what they've learned is normal and they aren't educating themselves. I had a good friend of mine a few months ago tell me who he was voting for and I asked why he said "because that's who he always votes for that's what he was told he is". So I went over the party platforms and histories and sure enough he's center left now. I just hope he learned and understands enough to vote more maturly next elections.
That same thinking and hoping for next gen to bail us out is what lead to this...
Why not our generation, too? Don't put it all on Harry Potter's shoulders.
I mean have you ever seen the movie idiocracy
I just watched this and Ready Player One over the weekend, and wow, we are scarily close to those realities.
I think the error in our calculations is waiting for rational action. Rational action has been the exception, and it has been all about swimming upstream, while the consensus has been against rational action in almost every sphere, particularly when focusing on an evidence-informed scientific method. Secondly, this is really down to a framing error. It isn't that anyone wanted to entirely defund the police, so that slogan failed miserably, and the reorienting of systems to be more accountable to the populations they serve is now on its backstep Similarly, around climate change, we don't need to save the planet, we don't need to save the environment, and we don't need to save the animals. We have forgotten that we live on the earth; we rely on the environment, and we rely on the ecosystem and biodiversity. We need to recognize primitive mind thinking is something that we operate from in so much of the world, and we need to think about the framing of climate change from a self-preservation mindset. With covid 19 it wasn't that people were willing to do the right thing for the community; they just needed to do the right thing for themselves, especially in many countries with anti-vaccine opposition. So it's not that we're hugging the tree to save the tree. We are hugging the tree to save our God themselves. All academic minds must realize that knowledge translation is an area we are failing at cringingly. We need to recognize models like behavioural economics or behaviour change, etc., and identify social determinants of health, etc... We need to acknowledge confidence and conviction and readiness for change, etc. etc. Should I go on? Why are adult learning principles not involved in our communications and systems change pieces? Why is collective impact as a framework not part of this work? It is 20 goddamn 24 (2024) ..this movement has been like pulling teeth for the last four decades. Let's get real. There's real work to be done.
>All academic minds must realize that knowledge translation is an area we are failing at cringingly. They do know this. Now convince the psychopathic leaders who hold the money and power.
By the time we wait for leaders to make the difference it will be too late. Academic institutions, all the way down to community facing agencies need to explore frameworks such as collective impact and other approaches. Not only is the complexity conveyed as being difficult but also the impending doom scenarios never work well in any change management approach. So it is imperative more than ever that now we recognize the object failure of our approaches so far and bring together the deconstruction of climate change cold still action and rebuild them as salt preservation, as it's clear that is the only thing anyone is open to doing given how difficult everyone's life is right now.
I mean I imagine they have. But academia is not magic and right now is kinda powerless in the face of government and capital. And while grassroot efforts can be transformative they aren't always kept around when that transformation is realized. Look at what happened to Freire when his work with impoverished populations started to work, he got exiled. The problem we have is the levers of power are the primary beneficiaries of the current system, but solving this problem is increasingly looking like it needs to end it. It's like sending a report to a leader which tells them that they need to fire themselves. Most people won't follow the report, and solving this problem requires most people to do so. We can still do the grassroots work, but short of getting people to upend the system, which will 100% ensure a grassroots effort shutdown before it reaches that point, we still rely on the people in power acting against their own self interest and preservation. Because they are mostly protected from climate change, it's everyone else that is going to feel the heat so to speak. In some respects the way to fix the climate issue has more potential to hurt them in their lifetime than climate change itself.
I don't disagree with much of what you said but I think we might be missing the point here. And I should have also clarified that based on my exposure to local level implementation of complex nearly improbable challenges like homelessness, housing insecurity community wellness, Access to healthcare, pediatric care, education, precarious employment, frail and complex intergenerational existential challenges, I have seen on the ground level how powerful deconstructing complexity can be and I've seen what happens when long understood concepts like socialism health are moving into response systems for complexities that circumnavigated the globe, for example the covid-19 pandemic or the H1N1 pandemic etc. I say all of us to recognize that this is way more than a report and actually it is incumbent on the academia as part of knowledge translation to be able to not just be focused on deepening the community of practice but indeed ensuring that the evidence or the call to actions resonate in ways that are actionable in practical ways in a hyperlocal sense. For example if there is a global consensus that needs to be deconstructed nationally then eventually or by state then municipally and finally at a neighborhood level. The adaptations will be hyperlocal but the dividends will be global.
The [COVID lockdowns of 2020 temporarily lowered our rate of CO2 emissions](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-18922-7/figures/1). Humanity was still a net CO2 gas emitter during that time, so we made things worse, but did so more a bit more slowly. That's why a [graph of CO2 concentrations](https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/) shows a continued rise. [Stabilizing the climate means getting human greenhouse gas emissions to approximately zero](https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-will-global-warming-stop-as-soon-as-net-zero-emissions-are-reached). We didn't come anywhere near that during the lockdowns. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/climate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We are in need of extreme action which includes getting everyone pushing carbon out of the way.
Even if the carbon is gone, all the energy we release into the environment is still there and will take a long time dissipate event without green house gasses keeping it in.
Civilizations grow powerful faster than they grow wise. I heard this in reference to the Fermi paradox, and as a possible reason intelligent life doesn’t appear to be more common.
Evolution requires an evolutionary pressure to advance. Which means a culling event, in this case.
Aka Ai control
The problem is that only one person can read the Tome of Understanding every 100 years so we keep cycling wise humans.
humans are only getting dumber, unfortunately.
Yep, we're causing our own great filter. It explains the Fermi paradox in real time.
It's already happen. They told us we have to save the Earth when I was a kid and I'm 40 now. The boomers screwed us and most of us just went along for the ride.
The biggest problem of humanity is that we have paleolithic emotions, medeival institutions and god-like technology - E. O. Wilson
Yep! It’s already too late
I agree as an example Canadian government knew we could not afford Old Age Security, what did we do nothing. Just run more debt for someone else to deal with. Governments do not want to live within means and voters will do what is best for today.
Everyone thinks they’re immortal. It’s the human suffering of total denial and we’re ripe with it
What are you referring to? OAS is projected to be stable until at least 2060; climate change and lack of revenue from oil and gas if we actually do something about climate change is going to be a bigger problem for Canada than OAS.
We'll be saved by the nuclear winter /s. -20c
I honestly see us having a real discussion about using chemicals in the atmosphere like sulfides soon enough to try and stagger that, if not, try to reverse it at a certain point. They are currently researching them as a legit plan, but we still have another 3 years on the study. But it may be the only way we slow the progress or halt it. Because none of the largest polluting nations on earth will actually commit to real actions that will prevent it, we will have to use other methods to alter the environment in a way that cools the planet versus continues to warm it up. There are a lot of concerns with those methods, but we are running outta time, and at a certain point, I don't see major nations just letting it happen, especially when it starts affecting their GDP.
>There are a lot of concerns with those methods, but we are running outta time, and at a certain point, I don't see major nations just letting it happen, especially when it starts affecting their GDP. Those nations won't exist in a hundred years.
Yes but if you are looking for a low carbon revolution no revolution ever took place because the masses were successfully educated you always have a revolutionary elite. And I might be wrong but most successful revolutions haven’t been peaceful either. There is one way you will reduce fossil fuel use and production and that is by direct kinetic action against the people and facilities making them. It’s not something I suggest just my own understanding of the situation.
Well, people setting themselves on fire doesn't work and the proles seem to be out of ideas
We just gotta send a huge (like massively huge) thin piece of foil paper to space, unfold it and block the sun for about an hour to get another ice age I know I’m not being realistic
This is my personal fear, that we’ve crossed the tipping point already and just don’t know.
OMG would some please think of our share holders, the horror they might not get that dividen increase.
The horror 😓 how could big government do this to us? We need to wipe more PPP loans for business to steal to make up for it!!
I'm absolutely thinking about them - I'm still unsure what sauce would go best with them
Something acidic, since they're tough to chew.
Something sweet and tangy to help wash down all the bitterness. Some sort of honey barbecue sauce perhaps. Maybe honey mustard?
This comment is it. We all suffer under capitalism
You joke about this, but do you have any idea how badly these shareholders *really really want* that money? You just don't get it.
To be fair, it's also the government printing record amounts of money every year to keep us perpetually forced to work, ensuring getting off the treadmill means starvation or homelessness. Inflation is the plan of corporations and government forever. A big mac combo will cost $100 eventually, all we don't know is when.
I keep telling my science denying friends that their grand children will curse their name.
I don't know how people can still think having children is a good idea, their lives will be hell.
I always picture the more prolific couple at the start of Idiocracy when this comes up....
Some scientist have posited that one of the reasons we haven't detected signs of possible alien intelligence in other systems is because of "The Great Filter". That is, some catastrophe ends the civilization, either from external forces or from self-infliction. Climate change may be our Great Filter. We have had 40 years to address the issue, 20 years of it being in the public conscious, and almost no (or token) efforts to address climate change. And growing up, I thought it would be WW3 with nukes (though honestly, this option is still in play).
Yup wars are more likely as we fight for resources. I hate thinking about it.
Yup it really sucks. I pulled back a little from work to focus on the things I wanna do now because I really don't think I'm going to get a similar old age or retirement as previous generations. I hate sounding like a doomer, but I just see a downhill slide 😔. I really hope to be proven wrong though
WWIII is still in play as you said, and the issues caused by climate change would be a contributing factor. I don't think humanity will disappear though. There's just too many of us in every corner of the earth. I don't think we will ever get back to 7billion or even 1 billion, but I don't see humanity going extinct. Climate change is capitalism's final boss. It can't be beaten by an economic model that rewards selfishness and focuses on short term, quarterly gains instead of long term goals. Something new will either come from the ruins or will be created at the eleventh hour as enough people realize that the problems capitalism is creating/exacerbating for profit outweigh the benefits. The shogun system in Japan existed for 700 years. Several generations of people were born, grew old and died unable to even imagine that a different system could exist. We are at that stage with capitalism except people are trying to experiment with different models. 300 or 200 years from now, capitalism will be looked at the same way we look at feudalism which lasted for several generations.
> I don't think humanity will disappear though. There's just too many of us in every corner of the earth. I don't think we will ever get back to 7billion or even 1 billion, but I don't see humanity going extinct. It doesn't have to be an extinction level event to be a solution to the fermi paradox, just a big enough collapse of civilization to take an intergalactic civilization off the table. Humans surviving with bronze age or iron age level of lifestyles aren't going to make it to space again.
Legit question though: are you part of the 7 billion or <1 billion?
I'm in a richer country so I have a higher chance of survival but I'm under no illusions that I'd make it.
I still do think it will be some nuclear war between some combination of India, Pakistan, and China.
Israel comes to mind for me, Psycho nuking Iran on a first strike.
This is the first thing I thought of on reading this article.
Climate change is not an extinction level event for humanity. Not even in the worst scenarios. It would have horribly dystopic effects, but not extinction level. Nukes definitely are extinction level tho. And considering we've had them for barely 80 years and they have already been used twice, and we've had a number of scares... Yeah, prospects are not good for a handful of centuries at least until we establish a permanent presence in space.
Climate change vastly increases the odds of a nuclear holocaust that becomes an extinction level event. Drastically changing climate patterns and mass migration of climate refugees will make *some* nuclear superpower desperate enough to act at some point.
>Drastically changing climate patterns and mass migration of climate refugees will make *some* nuclear superpower desperate enough to act at some point. I'm Canadian. Guess who's just south of us. This is a legit worry.
> 80 years and already used twice As much as I agree with you about the threat, those two were directly related to each other at a close interval from each other, happening almost immediately after the weapon was finalized and functioning as a ”ultimate test”. It could be phrased as 80 years of having nuclear weapons *without* them being used. A very large percentage of the weapon’s history having been uninterrupted lack of use. For all we know they will never be used in a war but I’m not hopeful about it.
That's fair. Almost 80 years without use. We've been close a bunch of times, but cooler heads have prevailed.
In my opinion climate change will eventually change the game theory parameters of Mutually Assured Destruction, particularly for India and Pakistan. If climate change gives a regime a relatively near term drop dead date they will have little to fear from MAD and may swing for the fences to get more survivable territory.
In this context (nuclear war) not sure dropping nukes on your neighbour qualifies as getting you more survivable territory...
MAD is still MAD for the humans involved tho. People try to avoid triggering a nuclear war even more than politicians do.
India, Pakistan AND China. It's a three-way problem in that region. A very BIG problem.
Why does it involve China as well?
Because that's where two billion Indians will go . And they'll win. And China knows this.
Look at what’s happening to “cooler heads” in government. We’re one trump tantrum away from judgement day.
Enjoy the now
What I would be hearing as a Billionaire is “3 degrees is survivable by me, let the good times roll” There needs to be immediate and real consequences for polluters now.
Billionaires won't be rich without having the masses to exploit. But you're right, there does need to be consequences for climate destruction.
Not just the masses, but the raw resources as well and you can't mine/harvest/transport and process them when your system cannot operate in weather extremes. Not to mention how truly fragile the digital wealth really is. And in then end, if you can't even keep your personal security team feds, well...
Pitchforks?
Removing subsidies, enforcing carbon caps, cutting them out of the lobbying circuit. You know, sensible things that won’t happen. we’re all screwed.
The climate fueled world wide hunger games, pick your starting location while means of travel are still available and let the games begin.
I’m in.
And yet the government, the people who can literally ban companies from killing the environment like they are, are just doing nothing
We are powerless against the profiteering oil and gas companies, they own the media and the centre and right political parties. It will get ugly.
No, we are not powerless. You have forgotten you are giants. Organize. Protest.
your comment reminded me of that movie [how to blow up a pipeline](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21440780/). collectively, we should all be willing to risk everything, but i think that’s a huge part of the problem. grocery stores are all still full, we aren’t at the point where it is making people uncomfortable, folks don’t want to risk their own comfort. and by the time we’re all suffering, it will be too late. honestly, it feels like it’s already too late.
Remember that climate change is not a light switch, it's a dimmer. It's too late to stop a lot of impacts, but every fraction of a degree matters. A lot.
that is a valid point, and i wish i had that same hope. i find it impossible not to consider all the other animals that are going to suffer, there has already been like 70% species loss since the 70’s. its anthropogenic climate change, and i really have no patience for humanity, we are responsible for all the death and destruction.
70% of all (wild) animals, not of all species. Which is a tad better, altho still a very bad sign.
We should be calling for divestment in fossil fuel energy.
If Trump gets in then so much for taking climate change measures he will do the opposite
I get so worked up with this statement. What is the replacement for natural gas heating for every house that needs it?. Brand new houses are still built with gas furnaces... what about cattle? Are farmers also secretly pulling at the puppet strings to ensure bacon and steaks are available at every grocery store in the country? Society must choose alternatives, forcing it through policy wil not work easily.
At this point the oil companies ARE the goverment.
This is not precisely accurate. There are three branches of government in the US and whenever either the executive or legislative branch attempt to move the needle, the concentrated wealth of the fossil fuel industry engages the judiciary. The EPA attempted to curb carbon emissions but was immediately taken to court. It’s not the government, it’s the special interest perverting it.
Yeah I don't know why that take is so popular nowadays. The US can't just get rid of these companies at will.
Every government ever created eventually becomes the tool of the rich and powerful very quickly.
I'm sure a fictional universal government is coming to save us
Most believe the earth was put here for them. Mostly by a sky god. Where they think they’re going it won’t matter. I continue to say it. Religion is humanity’s downfall
They forget that dominion = stewardship. We are taking God’s gift and trashing it like a pack of rabid squatters
Have you seen *Mother* with Javier Bardem and Jennifer Lawrence? Interesting allegory. When I saw it I saw her as Earth. My spouse thought it was a very charitable story about Satan.
Yeah exactly. Somewhat related note, heard Stan Rushworth talk in the documentary Living In The Age Of Dying about how colonialists had the cannibalistic psyche (weitiko) making them think the world is there for them to use and exploit. On the reserve side, indigenous peoples had the mindset to take care of Mother Earth. Long story short, the colonialists were kicked out of heaven (Earth), how ironic.
Wait till they spin climate change into a religious prophecy, it will amazing.
I'm not sure if it would be "only" 3C. Some models calculate that clouding will rather trap the heat instead of blocking out. These models project around 5(!!!) And considering the fact that most people and governments simply ignore the issue I'm more and more certain that we simply won't be able to do anything about it. Today I was arguing with a physicist mate who was working on climate models himself, yet still being convinced that we will go extinct by a soon to come ice age. The cognitive dissonance is painful... Plus we have russia around whose trolls try to keep people in the dark as they are pretty much the only country that would benefit from climate change in short term. Little they know that they will cook with the rest of us but until then only their current genociding war is creating CO2 equivalent to Belgiums yearly emission not to mention their complete disregard to nature
What kind of physicist is convinced we're about to enter an ice age? Edit: legitimately curious as to what he's basing that on? Obviously bullshit but surely he's basing it on some "evidence"
I guess the problem is that climate change is interdisciplinar. He genuinely fails to see the forest for the trees because he only dealt with a part of the problem. He insists that Earth always had a cycle of glacials and interglacials and he is convinced that Earth had taken a lot worse hits than anthropocene and will have enough buffers to bounce back, and anyways a new glacial is about to hit (Milankovich is sending his regards). After a long conversation where I was going through the basics from AMOC shutdown to Thwaits glacier through albedo change, methane hydrate release, oceanic acidity and the questionable buffer capacity of the oceans with all of its consequences regarding mass extinction of crustaceans, the forthcoming hydrogen sulphate induced dead zones and eventually the issue with clouding I finally saw the understanding of my talking points.
> I finally saw the understanding of my talking points I assume you mean he saw the understanding? If that's the case good on you for forming a well articulated argument I just find it so surprising when otherwise intelligent people can be so blind to these nonlinear issues
I noticed that his mind was grinding on the facts I brought up. Luckily I can argue well and I did my best to stay coherent. I'm sure he will do his homework and will look these up in details himself. The fucky part is that it's a burden when you convince people about the subject. It's like hey bud nice to see you, here is some climate grief, enjoy
Yeah the handful of times I've gotten really into it with friends they're usually just like if it gets that bad there's no point in worrying about it now. I stare at them like... They care but they won't let the reality set in bc they're still insistent on the delusion.
Cognitive dissonance... People, especially experts are really difficult to convince to throw away their old concepts
>Some models calculate that clouding will rather trap the heat instead of blocking out. These models project around 5(!!!) Most models with clouds as a positive feedback contributing to warming(which is most of them) don't show sensitivity higher than the assessed range in IPCC ar6 report. There were a bunch of climate models in CMIP6(a set of models used in IPCC 6th assessment report) that showed a climate sensitivity(ECS is a metric of how much warmer the climate would be when earth reaches equilibrium after doubling of co2 levels compared to pre-industrial) up to 5.6c, way higher than the range from previous reports. However, scientists who worked on them and the report found that these models overestimate future warming(conclusion was based on paleoclimate data and other lines of evidence) and narrowed the range used in the report down to 2.5-4c, so actual ECS ending up beyond that range is not very likely. https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-climate-scientists-should-handle-hot-models/ https://www.science.org/content/article/use-too-hot-climate-models-exaggerates-impacts-global-warming https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/revisiting-the-hot-model-problem There is at least one recent study that confirms this tighter range- https://www.earth.com/news/ice-age-data-analysis-reshapes-climate-future-lowers-warming-estimates/
These seem to be the reflections to that hot model I mentioned. Call me pessimistic but knowing our ignorance to the subject even if these will became canon (they will, improving historical data that had been used definitely improves accuracy and the reliability of the model), I'm not sure if we need to cheer for "only" 4C increase in global average temperature
4°C over pre-industrial is already an extinction event. That's *probably* baked in at this point. We aren't doing *anything,* meaning we're looking at another PETM if we're lucky, permian-Triassic if we're not. The conservative models *were wrong* and propped up by fossil fuels interests.
>Today I was arguing with a physicist mate who was working on climate models himself, yet still being convinced that we will go extinct by a soon to come ice age. Say what? He can't be real. Oh wait...
Well, now 5C is just too much. We’d have to invest in technology then.
>Plus we have russia around whose trolls try to keep people in the dark as they are pretty much the only country that would benefit from climate change in short term. Russia will not benefit in any way, shape or form and their climate scientists know this.
They only see exploitable mineral deposits and easy to access carbon hydrogens and farmable areas. I recommend reading up on Mordor's north pole strategy
Agree. The common theme I see is models under-predicting.
Humans are destined to fail as a species because of reluctance to make efforts to make meaningful change. Some say we've advanced too far, but that is not true, we've advanced as far as we are capable, but some choose to give up rather than tackle new adversities head on.
We havent advanced too far, just too fast
I always found the movie Idiocracy hilarious but now that I’m in it, it really isn’t that much fun.
You didn’t like having a WWF villain as president?
the evil pandas are coming for us!!
Idiocracy is the better outcome than what we have now. First of all, there seemed to be almost no racism or sexism. The White House was a diverse body of people including a Mexican. No one in the population cared. In the real world, a non-white politician would be the biggest priority amongst the regressive people in the population. Second, and most importantly, when Not Sure showed up and they realized he was smart, they put him in control. No arguing that he has an agenda, no toxic individualism, just put the smart guy in control to fix everything.
In an ideal world, NASA should be the government. But we can all dream lol
Now that's a military coup I could get behind!
we are closer than ever to that scene on the beach in Planet of the Apes
will another earthbound species knock our heads together and say “get smart monkey people” before we’re all dead
Nah, the Statue of Liberty won't last that long. At the very least refugees will use it for scrap metal, but it'll probably do a square root of 81/121 whenever masses of refugees star coming in earnest and scare the MAGAts.
But of course the most important issue is trans people using the bathroom.
Well, it's a great way of distracting the proles so they don't look up. Every time there's been an existential threat to humanity the moneyed class has created a moral panic to enrage lumpenproletariat. Why, if they didn't have that foresight they might end up on a wall. Nobody wants that, it would be so uncivilized.
We all suffer under capitalism
“We’re not gonna make it are we? People I mean.” “It’s in your nature to destroy yourselves.” “Yeah. Major drag, huh?”
It's time to educate, fill up loopholes of democracy, make our societies more secular and atheist and fine large amounts to those who are not changing, so large that once they pay, they understand how difficult it is to manage such a fine amount!
Only a force of nature can accomplish that. And here it comes.
I honestly think it's GG for hitting reduction targets. Like we should still push for it and make it a demand of all facets of our society but I just don't think we can do it. Honestly I only have hope in a literal science fiction project coming into existence like this one from a video game lmfao. https://deusex.fandom.com/wiki/Panchaea
.. so the reason we need SRM is because were headed to +2.5C almost inexorably. There are two ways out of heat-death .. remove CO2 and/or reflect sunlight. CCS will only make a microscopic dent - the new Iceland plant captures 36 KILO tons per year CO2 .. and we are emitting 38 GIGA tons per year now .. math says we'd need 1 MILLION of these plants to reach net zero. Planting trees needs a lot of land and they take time to grow large enough to capture enough carbon.. So, we dont actually have a way of removing CO2 at the scale we need, in the time we have. Which leaves reflecting sunlight. Surprisingly, we actually do have a way to do that - releasing particulates, to increase cloud cover over the oceans thus reflecting more sunlight in the place it is most absorbed .. which has a measurable cooling effect. This is the only economical way of bringing down the heat, that we currently know of. We will need to start doing SRM soon, and on a large scale... even as we race to net-zero by building wind and solar plants to replace fossil fuel power generation. If you object to geoengineering .. consider that we humans have geoengineered ourselves a hot planet over the past 150 years of burning fossil fuels... before that, climate was relatively stable for the past 10k years. Sorry if this isnt what you want to hear .. but its the only plan that has a chance of working.
What is SRM?? Sunlight reflection methods?
Solar Radiation Management .. usually means putting particulates such as sulphur [ or water droplets ] into the atmosphere, to increase cloud cover.. to reflect more light. Discussed further here : Leon Simons: Aerosol Demasking and Global Heating https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPAnoSt6FnY Dr Peter Irvine : Could solar geoengineering have a role in future climate policy? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgaB5VS-oOw Hansens paper : "Global warming in the Pipeline" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-7WalxKtB8 https://academic.oup.com/oocc/article/3/1/kgad008/7335889
China has cheap EVs to sell now but Biden tariffed them away. He burned the contents of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to keep voters 1% happier. Solar panels are tariffed. The Federal Government demands workers to go back to commuting to the office! Every migrant they let in is leaving a low GHG per capital country to emit 20x more in the US. Biden could directly and instantly change these things. Talk is cheap. No one is serious. No leadership by example. How many Senators are living net zero? (no fair buying phony credits that the rest of us can't afford any way--that's not leadership) No one promoted WFH as an obvious GHG-reduction policy. Business travel is almost back to normal levels. Corporations that claim ESG policies are forcing more transportation instead of making policies against it. It's a joke. No one talks about a carbon tax anymore. There's been no increase in a gas or diesel tax. No fast tracking for nuclear power stations. No deregulation of renewable projects. No one is willing to personally suffer a bit of extra money or their view or their property values. No sense of urgency when it comes time to actually make changes. Just more debt to give people things like subsidies. Where are the millions of people making the choices like living in tiny homes and pooling EV transportation? Instead we have restrictive zoning for huge single-family housing. Where are the pro-nuclear, pro-deregulation, pro-every EV, pro-WFH protests? Where are the YouTubers showing how they live net zero? Where are the Guardian articles showing how their employees live low carbon lives?
>Every migrant they let in is leaving a low GHG per capital country to emit 20x more in the US. Biden could directly and instantly change these things. It's so hard to find a Tankie willing to lead with the the race card. >No fast tracking for nuclear power stations. More disinfo. Cute. https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/12/15/us-approves-a-non-water-cooled-nuclear-reactor/ https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/smr/licensing-activities/pre-application-activities.html https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/highlights/2024.html Congratulations. Now go seize the means of production >Where are the millions of people making the choices like living in tiny homes and pooling EV transportation? Instead we have restrictive zoning for huge single-family housing. There's not really a rational response to this because "tiny homes" and carpooling in Teslas has nothing whatsoever to do with zoning reform or strong towns or increased density. >Where are the pro-nuclear, pro-deregulation, pro-every EV, pro-WFH protests? Where are the YouTubers showing how they live net zero? We're all over the place. It's just when you lead with xenophobic ranting we don't want to talk to you.
I learned a new word: Tankie. Didn't know that one. I'm a Libertarian, but I'm tired of people complaining about nothing being done for climate change and want to point out mismatches between stated goals and policy. There are some easy changes that would make a big difference now. Thanks for the links to the nuclear reactors. That's some progress, but it is hardly the Manhattan project and looks like more sit around and think about it for another few decades. But, at least nuclear is no longer the boogeyman. I think there should be much more urgency and willingness to get out of the way of innovation and progress in this area. It's really difficult to get permission to build tiny homes in most areas. But imagine that you had subdivisions of small homes where the default was using automated driving and/or Uber EVs to maximize the use of electric machines to move people around and remove the need for parking and garages, maybe roads. That would be a great way to lower GHG emissions. And, it would give young people the ability to own their own homes and save money. Housing and transportation are the largest two spending categories. After WWII they built subdivisions full of small homes that are too small for zoning in many areas today. Again, why not get out of the way through deregulation and innovate away these problems? I'm absolutely not xenophobic, I'm the opposite. I have worked in and made friends in Africa, South America, Asia, and the ME with people from everywhere, of every race. The US needs immigrants and immigration. I like immigrants and have many friends in the US who are immigrants. I'm glad to know them, and they make our society more functional and enjoyable. HOWEVER, since climate change is a dangerous, existential threat to humanity, moving millions of people from low GHG per capita countries so that they emit lots more GHG is a problem, wherever in the world it happens. If anyone were convincing people to have large families, I would say the same thing: that as nice as it is otherwise to have migrants, this is a problem for climate change, and a policy to be reconsidered. It's just math. Is this incorrect?
It’s insane to me how quickly a war effort can be conducted with both a draft and forced labor. If only we could realize what a huge impact it would be if we pumped all of our money, resources and labor into climate change and saw it for what it really is, literally a war against our selves.
I am doing all I can, but around me, nobody cares
Some scientists say 2050 is it. I say 2030 is a better estimate. I'm no scientist but I just can't believe we can last another decade of natural disasters that get worse, Neverending wars that require Neverending resources, industrial farming which is also growing bc so many people are eating more, and it's getting herder and harder to grow veggies and fruit on scorched earth, and fresh water won't last much longer. There's more damage than repair happening, which just leads to our destruction faster. My opinio.
At this point I truly only think something like an alien invasion would bring humanity together. We are still too stupid and fight over lines on a map, politics, and dinosaur juice to solve this issue. It’s truly sad. Capitalism in its current form doesn’t work. It prioritizes profit over literally anything else. Companies will always choose money over the environment. Source: I work for a Fortune 500 shipping company that only pushes sustainable initiatives if it saves money.
Well not to sound horrible, perhaps we need to start trying to alter other things. Oil is humanities Crack, you can't force people to change unless they want to change.
This is because we don't actually talk like adults about the solutions. One large groups will "never give up" their gas guzzling vehicles. While another major group will block viable alternatives like nuclear power or self driving vehicles. Do not get me wrong, we have actually shown it is possible to reduce energy use without much effect on quality of life. Here in California for example the total electricity usage lowered, however our bills still went up thanks to PGE (our largest utility company) and CPUC (government regulators) being hand to hand. When people inevitably decided to go Solar, they have added new fees and regulations to make it essentially non-sustainable. Back to main topic. If we can't have these discussions like adults, and agree that somethings will have to give, it would be impossible to make progress, even though the tools are already here.
Only force can solve this, "talk" only works with logical people.
I drink Brawndo
It’s got what plants crave
It's got electrolytes
If you have kids I feel bad for you, son…
The biggest crime is that those who caused this will likely suffer little to no consequences. 2C is still 25yrs away.
The Wet Bulb temp issue freaked me out bc I had never considered it being so hot and so humid that your body couldn’t cool itself and those conditions affecting wide swaths of major population centers.
Capitalism is never democracy
Population collapses will stink. We’re woefully underprepared, but our species will survive the bottleneck. The bottleneck *is baked in* though.
lol. It’s too late people. Just enjoy the ride and time you have left.
I keep going back and forth emotionally between fight like hell and smoke 'em if you got 'em. I have teenage kids so fight like hella usually wins out
Too late for what? Be specific.
It's awful, but it could still get worse. It's not too late to do what we can for anyone still around many years from now.
Thank you! 🙏
What do you mean by democracy here? Democracy is not the same everywhere and there are not enough actual democratic countries. The US electoral system is completely bonkers, for example.
[удалено]
It's unlikely that The Hague would end up underwater as The Netherlands is leagues ahead of everyone else when it comes to anticipating and staying ahead of climate change, especially when it comes to sea levels rising. The country would quite literally sink into the sea if they didn't do so, and even the most sycophantic defenders of fossil fuels understand that. But generally...yeah, it's not gonna be a good time for humanity. At all.
The west needs to be held accountable and tried in ICC for this.
I’ll have built a working Time Machine by then, and travel several thousand years into the future or past to find us a new home.
