|
Preen Dog posted:I can hardly hope a global, ad hoc, something or other understanding will get hashed out eventually, as keen green nations lean on their dirty trading partners. Even then, power plants are built to last 60 years or more; the agreements will be hilariously post-dated.
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 02:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:01 |
|
|
Looks like May 2018 might break all the records we got since we started recording the temperature in Finland.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 08:18
|
|
|
spf3million posted:I like the idea of some sort of trade organization that requires certain emissions reductions targets to gain admittance. Countries not complying with the targets would be left on the outside and be forced to pay tariffs on goods exported to the member countries. I know next to nothing about world trade but isn't that sort of what the WTO does except for the rules are regarding certain equal business practices and other fairness and possibly human rights agreements? The WTO is mostly all about removing barriers to trade so it would be out of character for it to advocate for higher tariffs. They tolerate anti-dumping and countervailing duties because they protect businesses, but a paradigm change would be required to get them to tolerate additional duties based on ecological concerns. I mean, hell, they don’t care about labor standards, why would they care about carbon emissions?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 09:52
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Can they make everything but the current year be transparent or something?  I went to the website and pulled the data. Did it for volume, not area (the conversion looks complicated), and also I can't find the 2017-2018 data. It's quite abhorrent how bad they make that picture look. I'm using the same software they do. If anybody wants the code, or throw the area data until 2018 at me ...
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 11:31
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:This is ignorant, no-one claims this. Everyone understands switching from fossil fuels is not easy, as they're simply the cheapest available energy source. One of the major goals of climate activism is to artificially make fossil fuels relatively more expensive via a carbon tax. This isn't compatible with a belief that decarbonizing is easy or cheaper than the status quo. You don't understand this or are trying to mischaracterize the debate. I honestly don't understand why this is such a pervasive assumption, lcoe of renewable without subsidies has been below fossil fuels for quite a few years now. This assumes that new facilities are being built tho, as old facilities that just continue to work might still be cheaper to keep running. Grid implementation is a big cost factor for sure as well, but looking at production costs for new plants fossil fuels are falling behind quite quickly, including the holy grail nuclear.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 11:48
|
|
|
Son of Rodney posted:I honestly don't understand why this is such a pervasive assumption, lcoe of renewable without subsidies has been below fossil fuels for quite a few years now. This assumes that new facilities are being built tho, as old facilities that just continue to work might still be cheaper to keep running. Grid implementation is a big cost factor for sure as well, but looking at production costs for new plants fossil fuels are falling behind quite quickly, including the holy grail nuclear. Also transportation fuels are still strongly favorable from a cost perspective toward fossil fuels over renewable. Industrial power users also benefit from cogeneration where they can take advantage of high pressure for steam to drive pump/compressor turbines and use the low pressure waste heat for process purposes or to reduce other fired heat.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 13:49
|
|
|
Son of Rodney posted:I honestly don't understand why this is such a pervasive assumption, lcoe of renewable without subsidies has been below fossil fuels for quite a few years now. I mean, this is certainly true for coal, which is slowly being phased out, but much less so for natural gas. And when you look beyond LCOE natural gas provides advantages that renewables lack. It can provide baseload power generation. It can provide load-following services. It can even be used in peaker plants. And these advantages are almost certainly the reason that coal is mainly being replaced by natural gas rather than renewables, and why places that have focused on renewables instead (Germany, Denmark, California, etc.) haven't seen renewables' LCOE translated into low electricity prices.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JeremyHarrisTV/status/1000845163478925312quote:For the second time in two years, Main Street in Ellicott City was transformed into a raging river as thunderstorms lined up and unloaded torrential rain. The National Weather Service issued a flash-flood emergency for the city at 4:40 p.m. Sunday, its most severe flood alert, and reported water rescues underway. quote:Ellicott City has been rebuilding since the 2016 flooding damaged and destroyed businesses. Local officials recently said that 96 percent of the businesses were back in operation and more than 20 new businesses had again opened in the Main Street area. Are places like this just going to be slowly abandoned? A town where flooding like this becomes an every-other-year event does not seem viable.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 05:34
|
|
|
i had no idea where that was so just googled it, then looked at the terrain map layer, then looked at everything upstream of main street.... lol hey I wonder what happens to old main streets nestled in river beds when you pave and clearcut the poo poo out of everything upstream to build strip mall parking and quarter acre burb lots this is my favorite part about global warming, how it sometimes loving nails the things it should (like when houston got it)
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 05:42
|
|
|
That’s a terrible thing to say. The people of Houston didn’t deserve „getting it“.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 05:54
|
|
|
Yeah thats pretty messed up
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 07:03
|
|
|
the people didn't deserve it, but in a detached way I can see how "mankind" deserves it for our hubris
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 09:51
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:That’s a terrible thing to say. The people of Houston didn’t deserve „getting it“. just lol if you live in a monument to man's hubris like houston, phoenix or miami and plan on pretending like you didn't deserve what was coming
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:02
|
|
|
The obvious point is that always, poor people suffer more, from everything; and the poor people living there probably aren't perfectly free in their choice to live where they do. The more subtle point is that humanity is the only thing that matters. Gaia and the earth and the environment are only important insofar as they allow humanity to thrive. If you say humanity deserves to suffer for not protecting the environment, you're in some weird psychological frame where humanity is a misbehaving child or criminal or whatever, instead of living breathing people being the sole carriers of values in the cosmos.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:21
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:The obvious point is that always, poor people suffer more, from everything; and the poor people living there probably aren't perfectly free in their choice to live where they do. Manifest destiny, truly the greatest of humanitys achievements. gently caress you got mine on an intergalactic scale.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:23
|
|
|
people getting their hometowns utterly annihilated by climate change is a reality of the world and it's actually good when the first world experiences it because they are the ones driving the crisis, the ones benefiting from the causes, and ultimately the only people who can stop it
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:23
|
|
|
Ssthalar posted:Manifest destiny, truly the greatest of humanitys achievements. The problem with not doing that on a cosmic scale is that humanity is the only thing capable whose suffering fundamentally matters. If the suffering of shellfish and pigs and flowers is more distressing to you than the suffering of the millions of inhabitants of Houston, be aware you will find very little sympathy for your position amongst human beings, who usually ascribe value to human beings. self unaware posted:people getting their hometowns utterly annihilated by climate change is a reality of the world and it's actually good
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:29
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Thread title  lol at thinking climate disasters spurring on actual change is a bad thing and not the only way anything is going to change but yeah, nobody deserves anything bad to happen to them and americans are actually good people just stuck in a bad situation and not leading the charge on climate denial worldwide 90s Rememberer fucked around with this message at 14:35 on May 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:32
|
|
|
self unaware posted:
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:36
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:I could understand if you said something like, "it's terribly sad that people are suffering from natural disasters, but in the long run, the good consequences for our children will outweigh our current suffering". But you seem to be saying, "people deserve to have their lives ruined or destroyed because it's the only way to save Gaia". I think it's pretty clear what I said made sense because you had to rip off half of what I said and then quote it to misrepresent my views, probably because they make you uncomfortable and you know i'm right you're mourning soldiers fighting an unjust war
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:37
|
|
|
american suburban sprawl being destroyed by climate change specifically because its suburban sprawl with no/very-low body count is the absolute best case scenario for giving the right people the right message about getting our asses in gear
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:39
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:The problem with that within humanity is somebody else might be suffering. Are we ignoring the other sentient, self-aware creatures of planet Earth that posses emotions, culture and technology?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Are we ignoring the other sentient, self-aware creatures of planet Earth that posses emotions, culture and technology? a certain douglas adams quote comes to mind.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 14:52
|
|
|
self unaware posted:people getting their hometowns utterly annihilated by climate change is a reality of the world and it's actually good when the first world experiences it because they are the ones driving the crisis, the ones benefiting from the causes, and ultimately the only people who can stop it Well, no. You posted a graph of cumulative emissions, which might say something about responsibility, but a lot less about who's driving, benefiting from and can stop it. To determine that you'd have to look at the current emissions, where the US and EU combined emit less than China.  Source: EPA
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 15:21
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Well, no. You posted a graph of cumulative emissions, which might say something about responsibility, but a lot less about who's driving, benefiting from and can stop it. To determine that you'd have to look at the current emissions, where the US and EU combined emit less than China. You're right, if we ignore how the production of consumer goods to feed the demands of the first world has been offloaded to other countries.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:You're right, if we ignore how the production of consumer goods to feed the demands of the first world has been offloaded to other countries. This keeps coming up over and over but no, that doesn't change the calculation that much. When you account for imports and exports, the US emits a little more and China emits a little less, but the big picture stays unchanged. 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Well, no. You posted a graph of cumulative emissions, which might say something about responsibility, but a lot less about who's driving, benefiting from and can stop it. To determine that you'd have to look at the current emissions, where the US and EU combined emit less than China. china's per capita emissions are still lower than the US/Europe but I don't think looking at the world and saying "country with most emissions is the one that is 'driving, benefiting from and can stop it'" the chart does speak to the responsibility but it has nothing to do with why the first world is uniquely poised to solve the problem as opposed to the developing world. nor does it address who's benefiting from it.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 15:45
|
|
|
self unaware posted:china's per capita emissions are still lower than the US/Europe but I don't think looking at the world and saying "country with most emissions is the one that is 'driving, benefiting from and can stop it'" Well see, I never said that. But you did say "the first world" are "the only people who can stop it [global warming]", which is ridiculously wrong. The US and Europe could drop off the face of the Earth and we'd still be emitting an unsustainable amount of carbon, and the amount would keep growing every year. Like it or not climate mitigation is a global problem now.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 16:03
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:This keeps coming up over and over but no, that doesn't change the calculation that much. When you account for imports and exports, the US emits a little more and China emits a little less, but the big picture stays unchanged. Interestingly this picture is changing somewhat, as China itself is increasingly exporting emissions to other SE asia countries: Nature posted:14 May 2018  So yes China's emissions are peaking, but other places are gearing up to burn a lot of fossil fuels in turn. Ideally coal gets priced out by solar in the developing world ASAP.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 16:06
|
|
|
i don't think it's ridiculously wrong, and you're right that china is transitioning into one of the countries guilty and necessary to stop it, but as it stands the us and eu are uniquely poised (with their influence and resources) to handle the problem and simultaneously choose not to in a way that china doesn't. I'd say China does more to progress the fight on climate change than either the us or the eu. which is to be expected, democracy will never be able to provide an answer to a problem like climate change, it's tragedy of the commons turned up to 11
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
self unaware posted:i don't think it's ridiculously wrong, and you're right that china is transitioning into one of the countries guilty and necessary to stop it, but as it stands the us and eu are uniquely poised (with their influence and resources) to handle the problem and simultaneously choose not to in a way that china doesn't. I'd say China does more to progress the fight on climate change than either the us or the eu. Then your standards of what constitutes "progress" are completely FUBAR. OECD emissions peaked in 2007 and have fallen in 8 out of 10 subsequent years. Meanwhile, over the same period, Chinese emissions have skyrocketed from 7GtCO2 to greater than 10GtCO2. They've added the equivalent of the entire EU in CO2 emissions in 10 years, and they're not even planning for them to peak until 2030. It's clear you've just decided that the EU and the US are the bad guys and China are the good guys and won't be convinced otherwise, facts be damned.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
china is deploying nuclear at a massive scale. that alone is more progress than the US has mustered in 100 years post industrialization i dont know what you want china to do, it's 1.3 billion people, they aren't going to emit less total carbon than the US/EU unless they start slaughtering their people en masse
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
self unaware posted:china is deploying nuclear at a massive scale. that alone is more progress than the US has mustered in 100 years post industrialization But the US did deploy nuclear at scale, in fact a much more massive scale than China, to the point that it constitutes 20% of total electricity generation and 50% of clean energy generation. Those numbers are 2% and 5% in China. The US also produces more actual electricity from nuclear too. As for comparing them to the US and EU, the average Chinese citizen actually emits more per capita than the average EU citizen per capita. They've got Americans beat at least, but not for long. The facts simply do not support your good guys/bad guys narrative.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 16:49
|
|
|
there's no good guy bad guy narrative it's just that the us and the eu are the only ones that can lead this sort of change globally because of their position at the top of the global influence/power chain. china can be a part of that group and it doesn't change anything
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't China have a very aggressive solar deployment program they're implementing and planning on expanding?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 17:49
|
|
|
self unaware posted:i don't think it's ridiculously wrong, and you're right that china is transitioning into one of the countries guilty and necessary to stop it, but as it stands the us and eu are uniquely poised (with their influence and resources) to handle the problem and simultaneously choose not to in a way that china doesn't. I'd say China does more to progress the fight on climate change than either the us or the eu. you really don't seem to fully grasp what's going to happen as the world continues to get richer, there isn't jack loving poo poo the west can do to combat literal billions of people adopting western style diets (which has happened literally everywhere wealth has increased) and western styles of consumption, which are all inextricably linked to climate emissions. we are not decoupling, to any significant degree, high living standards from climate emissions anytime soon. The left's desire to eliminate worldwide poverty is in direct contradiction to the climate change goals, but people for some reason choose to ignore this because it makes them sad or they are just plain ignorant of the contradiction in the first place. Africa would loving love to consume beef or other high CC impact foods at US levels and if they have the cash it's absolutely going to happen.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 17:49
|
|
|
self unaware posted:there's no good guy bad guy narrative it's just that the us and the eu are the only ones that can lead this sort of change globally because of their position at the top of the global influence/power chain. china can be a part of that group and it doesn't change anything They cannot actually. This is no longer a US / EU problem and to continue to treat it as such is pure ignorance. ATP_Power posted:Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't China have a very aggressive solar deployment program they're implementing and planning on expanding? this is like saving pennies for your retirement. it's not a drop in the bucket, it's a drop in the ocean.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
self unaware posted:I think it's pretty clear what I said made sense because you had to rip off half of what I said and then quote it to misrepresent my views, probably because they make you uncomfortable and you know i'm right And cheering on their deaths strikes me as rather sociopathic. Conspiratiorist posted:Are we ignoring the other sentient, self-aware creatures of planet Earth that posses emotions, culture and technology?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
tsa posted:we are not decoupling, to any significant degree, high living standards from climate emissions anytime soon why not?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:01 |
|
|
like there's a reason smart people and money are going to the technological intervention side of things; you do what you can on the production side but the numbers simply don't work out under any reasonable constraints (social, political, scientific). The current state of affairs is such that (assuming scientists are roughly accurate in how much mitigation we need to avoid bad things from happening) we would need a fully workable plan agreed upon today. Paris was not that plan, and even that couldn't happen. We need Paris^10 and that isn't in the cards. Ignoring that, if we stopped today there still would be a variety of interventions that would be useful, like pulling existing carbon out of the atmosphere. https://climateone.org/audio/geo-engineering-climate-solutions
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2018 18:11
|
|