|
Alright Goons, the old climate change thread descended into nihilistic despondency that was driving away all but 7 posters. So I volunteered to start the new thread and recap what we know now, where we are, and what can be done to mitigate the disaster coming our way. But first, we are going to set some ground rules because I have no patience for the nihilism and it kills discussions and positive change quicker than organic mercury. Rules for the Thread 1. Nihilism is not welcome here. I am not asking you to be a shining beacon of hope and sunshine, but the whole “we are all doomed and nothing matters, so embrace the bloodshed” is not constructive and it is actively hurtful to galvanizing change. There are some people that suffer from depression and other illnesses that are negatively impacted by nihilistic messaging so cut it out and be part of the solution. IK NOTE: THIS WILL BE ENFORCED 2. Sharing stories about what you are doing to help is actively encouraged. Also, if you want to get good squads together for eco-projects or canvassing for eco-policies that is encouraged as well. 3. If possible, make sure to be specific to what region you are referring to in your posts i.e. Virginia or Midwestern USA. SA has users all over the globe so specificity is helpful. 4. Check your bad attitude at the door. I really shouldn't have to ask that people be civil to one another in a thread about a topic that affects everyone. Be kind to one another and make this thread welcoming for newer posters. Goals for this Thread The goals of this thread are fourfold: [list] 1. Sharing and discussing relevant and new information about climate change 2. Sharing and discussing information about private/NGO/government initiatives to fight it 3. Mobilizing initiatives for interested Goons in helping combat climate change through political, personal, and community action 4. A repository of useful resources for discussing climate change with the uninformed and uninitiated And now, a primer on climate change. Uranium Phoenix did an excellent job summarizing with their OP so I am quoting this from the old thread. Also, I don't have the time to comb through the entire thread to pick out all the good bits and type up a brand new OP. If there is any factual information in this OP that needs to be corrected, please let me know and I will do so. Uranium Phoenix posted:Climate Change: What is to be Done? Somebody fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Jul 7, 2021 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 17:25 |
|
|
# ? May 3, 2024 00:44 |
|
Eco-Fascist Goon Squad Station This is the place any goon activism initiatives will be posted for others to get involved or get informed about Suspicious Corporate Bedfellows An ally is an ally, but these corporations are doing good work in combatting climate change. We still give them the side eye though Climeworks These guys are very close to getting a cost-effective carbon removal tech up and running. They have a full-sized commercial plant that takes out 900 metric tons annually, built a smaller plant in Iceland that takes out 50 metric tons and turns it into stone, and are building another in Italy that will take our 150 metric tons of C02 out of the atmosphere annually. All together that is 1100 metric tons every year! Noteworthy Nonprofits Here is where we tabulate the efforts of nonprofits to combat climate change The Ocean Cleanup Project These lovely people invented an artificial coastline that is going to try to clean up the garbage islands in the oceans. Their first launch has been fully funded and I believe launched to tackle the Pacific Garbage Island. It isnt specifically anthropogenic climate change related, but not having all that microplastic leeching into the ocean is still helpful. C2CNT I admit I am not too familiar with the science behind this. Apparently, this group of plucky scientists is turning CO2 into Carbon Nanotubes. Feel free to correct me on this because I am bad at life Government....good? Government initiaves on the local/state/province/federal/whatever level to combat climate change are listed here THE NAUGHTY LIST This list details the companies or politicians that are not getting a visit from Santa or even coal, because that would encourage them. The primary goal of the "Naughty List" is to enable any suitably impassioned goons to target companies for boycotts or allow for some howler letters to their representatives in their government. The 100 Companies Responsible for 71% of the World's Emissions Go Get Em Goons Related Threads We have a lot of threads on SA that are tangentially related to Climate Change action Building Green Minus the Mold and Existential Dread: Home/Garden Edition Thread on building and living green for both rural and urban lifestyles State and Local Politics Thread Remember that all policy change starts at the local level. This thread also as a pretty active canvassing and goon action squad friendbot2000 fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Nov 19, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 17:25 |
|
The last thread's OP had a bunch of great resources. I will continue adding to this list as the thread goes on. If you have any suggestions for good additions, please let me know! Resources A. Useful Links Here are a bunch of useful informational links and resources about climate change for shouting yourself hoarse into the void. http://www.ipcc.ch/index.htm - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Includes all the scientific evidence you need. The Summary for Policymakers in each section is especially useful. Also a great source of visual aids like graphs and maps. http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ The report released by the IPCC on what we are potentially facing with Climate Change This report is harrowing, but is not set in stone yet. We can still have a great effect on mittigating Climate Change if action is taken now. http://www.withouthotair.com/ - Without Hot Air This is a free online book that sets aside rhetoric and actually talks about the numbers involved in different energy alternatives. This is a great reference for hard numbers and data. http://www.skepticalscience.com/ - Skeptical Science This site is great for covering common denier talking points and myths about climate change. Most of these arguments haven’t changed at all, so even if an argument is supposedly “new,” this site likely has a refutation. It also has its own links to follow, and it’s a great place to start if you don’t know a lot about climate science. An especially useful link they have is the Debunking Handbook, which goes over how to argue if you want to successfully change someone’s mind on a misconception. This is a great resource. http://www.carbontax.org/services/where-carbon-is-taxed/ - Carbon Tax Center As the site name implies, this is a pro-carbon tax site with information about carbon taxes and their effects. I’ve barely read it. Do the Math by Tom Murphy A blog dealing wih physics and math to assess energy growth options These posts are worth looking at in particular:
Articles Capitalism vs. the Climate Naomi Klein tackles why conservatives are so adamant at denying climate change, and why the liberal response is insufficiently radical. Her book This Changes Everything has a broader scope and also has great information. 2015 is Earth's warmest year by widest margin on record 2015 shattered warming records, with December being an especially hot month. This also goes into detail. This, of course, will be largely ignored or hand-waved away by deniers and delayers who's pet ideology is threatened by the facts of climate change. Years later, it might be used as 1998 was--an anomalously hot year they can compare future years to in order to show the slow rise of global temperatures as an excuse for inaction. NOAA and NASA Team Up to Investigate Strong El Niño Expect the usual effects of an El Niño. The good news is that scientists are well prepared to study the effects on a scope not previously done before. Over half the world’s population suffers from ‘severe’ water scarcity, scientists say (Scientific article: Four billion people facing severe water scarcity) A recent article highlighting the present state of water scarcity. Balancing agricultural demand with keeping ecosystems healthy and people fed will increasingly be a challenge, and it's important to know just how many people are vulnerable in this. (Thanks Hello Sailor). Australia Cuts 110 Climate Scientist Jobs - This loss will negatively affect our progress on understanding of the climate of the entire southern hemisphere. This is a prime example of how seriously most politicians are taking things right now. (Thanks Evil Greven) Giant holes found in Siberia could be signs of a ticking climate 'time bomb' Global Warming’s Terrifying New Chemistry (refers to this paper on CH4 emissions) Two articles on methane's effect on climate change. Methane hydrates in Siberia and other permafrost areas could cause a massive spike in atmospheric methane. Meanwhile, how much methane countries have been releasing has probably been drastically underestimated, and because methane is such a powerful greenhouse gas, we're probably a lot worse off than we thought. These are good articles for debunking the idea that natural gas/fracking is a good idea. (Thanks CheeseSpawn) Research Papers http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024 - Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature - A paper analyzing the scientific consensus on climate change. If you ever need a source for "97% of scientists agree with climate change", here it is. http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/media/erl460291datafile.txt - This is the papers analyzed by the above paper. If you ever wanted to look directly for the source of a claim, or are just interested in finding relevant climate research, this is a great resource. (Thanks totalnewbie and rivetz) B. Good Effort Posts
Feel free to propose additional links and articles to add to this list. C. SA Propoganda Office The people who can be reached by science and reason have already been converted to the reality of climate change. The others will require an approach not with logic and reason, but an approach centered around the heart. This is where art, music, and storytelling comes in. Propoganda can be a force for good and it is time to weaponize it for fighting Climate Change. PM me provocative pieces you find and I will list them here for people to spread. friendbot2000 fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Dec 31, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 17:26 |
|
IPCC SR15 posted:Scenario 3 [one possible storyline among worst-case scenarios]: Also, thread title should be "We're not allowed to talk about the necessary solution."
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 17:41 |
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Also, thread title should be "We're not allowed to talk about the necessary solution." Oh, that reminds me. I forgot to include a link to the IPCC Report. I think the necessary solution is a multipronged approach of individual/community action and governmental policy, but that is just me. Also, idk if anyone is paying attention, but the freshmen Democrats in the House are making quite a bit of noise on Climate Change and that is pretty big.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 17:48 |
|
How about some carbon sequestration technologies coming down the pipe? Quick rundown of one I like that another goon brought to my attention: C2CNT: Essentially a way to grow (really large, more useful for mechanical applications over electronic) CNTs out of CO2 in an ambient environment, probably starting off as a fossil fuel scrubber technology that would then ideally go into a kind of passive CO2 removal technology. https://carbon.xprize.org/prizes/carbon/teams/c2cnt Having read their papers and having a Phd. that's got some work adjacent to what their doing (I did some CNT synthesis for self assembeled dry spun CNTs) they don't have any obvious showstoppers that I can see, which is encouraging. They essentially use a controlled lithium soup in a narrow temperature band to precipitate CNTs on one of their electrodes. Only real issue is how to operate it continuously, by possibly knocking off the CNTs when they get thick enough to stop the reaction or by constantly switching out electrodes in the same bath or something else cute that I haven't thought of.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 17:58 |
|
I'm reposting a post I made in the previous thread:quote:I majored in atmospheric science in my undergraduate days, where I learned about the Carbonate-Silicate cycle and how CO2 gets removed from the atmosphere long-term. Anyway, the other day I was sort of idly pondering, and came up with an idea for carbon capture. I'll throw it out there, as I'm wondering if folks more knowledgeable than I have already pondered and dismissed it as impracticable or unworkable. One of the responses: Conspiratiorist posted:Just guessing the associated construction and operating costs, I think we'd have better luck seeding and sequestering algae. I think that's a valid point! My quibble regarding sequestering algae is that we'd probably need to take care of drying them out somehow so that they don't undergo anaerobic decomposition. Finding places to sequester them would be another thing, the thing I find elegant about just simply accelerating natural silicate-carbonate weathering is that you could just dump the spent rocks anywhere. Or I dunno, build highly densified megastructure cities or something.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 18:05 |
|
The Dipshit posted:How about some carbon sequestration technologies coming down the pipe? Nice! As much of a bad rap that Geo-Engineering gets I do believe it is part of the whole solution of mitigating and in the long term potentially reversing climate change. I have been following Climeworks pretty closely as they seem to be getting pretty close to that cost-effective level of carbon capture tech. I will put both of these in the OP as things to watch.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 18:07 |
|
The Dipshit posted:How about some carbon sequestration technologies coming down the pipe? Setting aside whether specific techs are workable or not, the problem in general with converting CO2 from point sources into useful products is that we produce waaaay too much CO2 for it to make any real impact on overall emissions. There just isn't enough demand for stuff that can be made out of CO2 even if you manage to do it efficiently. You would crash the carbon nanotube market with just the output from a handful of powerplants. A recent Nature paper makes that same point: Nature posted:The role of CO2 capture and utilization in mitigating climate change The rationale for these kinds of techs is that might help offset the cost of implementing CCS at fossil fuel generators, but it's not clear whether they will be worthwhile ie what is the EROI? They also don't help with the short-term emissions challenge, as actual implementation of CCS in electricity generators has been negligible. Nocturtle fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Nov 16, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 18:21 |
|
DrSunshine posted:I'm reposting a post I made in the previous thread: One of the better places to get money to look into things like this is the military. If you can convince generals, admirals (or their closest hangers on) that climate change will unpredictably and irreparably harm America's defense posture and your idea is part of an improved action plan to mitigate these the threats after a period of X years, enabling continued US presence in regions A, B, C while keeping expenditures below Y projections. The issue is, as ever, getting contact with them. Alternatively, using the above language in grant funding can help, but that's more of a competitive process. Military grants, and grants in general, need language with scope and material impact justifying everything. Mil folks especially love poo poo having that include descriptions and somewhat reasonable assertions of saving money (being good stewards of public funds), even if it doesn't end up saving any money. Officers get to put those impacts/numbers on their officer evaluation reports (OER), which is the way they get promoted. I don't know poo poo about atmospheric science, but if you do a back-of-the-envelope calculation comparing current reaction area and the resultant amplified reaction area per hopper and the resultant sequestered CO2 then you can get a rough idea of the effectiveness of the process. ETA: It's especially relevant right now because hurricane Irma completely took the Air Force by surprise and destroyed/disabled a tenth of our F-22 fleet and $5 billion in military hardware that wasn't able to be moved in time. Admiral Ray fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Nov 16, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 18:28 |
|
Nocturtle posted:Setting aside whether specific techs are workable or not, the problem in general with converting CO2 from point sources into useful products is that we produce waaaay too much CO2 for it to make any real impact on overall emissions. There just isn't enough demand for stuff that can be made out of CO2 even if you manage to do it efficiently. You would crash the carbon nanotube market with just the output from a handful of powerplants. A recent Nature paper makes that same point: I mean, pressurized CO2 is used in a lot of things and one of the things Climeworks has been doing is partnering with agricultural research and using the excess in greenhouses. I can see CO2 capture being used heavy with greenhouses to do research and granted this is the idealist in me talking, increase food production. Hmmm, I wonder what it would take to have a massive hydroponic greenhouse situation to just grow food and poo poo. What would the power costs be with that?
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 18:29 |
|
Nocturtle posted:Setting aside whether specific techs are workable or not, the problem in general with converting CO2 from point sources into useful products is that we produce waaaay too much CO2 for it to make any real impact on overall emissions. There just isn't enough demand for stuff that can be made out of CO2 even if you manage to do it efficiently. You would crash the carbon nanotube market with just the output from a handful of powerplants. A recent Nature paper makes that same point: Agreed, but I'd be totally stoked for super cheap CNT/Epoxy structural materials, and with them as cheap as garbage, you'd be able to expand the market super large. Also, I think I could see people do chemical unzipping to make absoulte gobs of high quality super-capacitors as well, which would help with electric buses and the like. And dare I say, 10% here, 10% there with mass afforestation/biochar sequestration, and things start adding up. We'll probably need to do the whole "All of the above" of technically feasible things to get this beast under control. The Dipshit fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Nov 16, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 18:34 |
|
The Dipshit posted:Agreed, but I'd be totally stoked for super cheap CNT/Epoxy structural materials, and with them as cheap as garbage, you'd be able to expand the market super large. I added this to the OP, but Climeworks is building a 3rd carbon capture facility in Italy that will take out 150 metric tons annually. So all together they are taking 1100 metric tons out of the atmosphere annually with 3 facilities: 1 full-scale(900) and two small scale (200)
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 18:38 |
|
Does this OP mean nihilism as in "individual action is completely meaningless and we're not allowed to talk about the only actual solutions on SA" or do you mean like "AceofFlames having a nervous breakdown every 5 pages about how we're all going to die and we all try to tell him that nothing matters anyways and to just be cool"? (AoF I know you're reading this, get out of this thread and go to therapy or at least e/n or something) Anyways, please everyone just read the most recent IPCC reports, and take into account that things are getting worse every day and even the most recent one is still not quite representing the situation as bad as it actually is before you start thinking that you're saving the world by slightly lowering your carbon footprint. There are billions of people in the world with an exponentially lower carbon footprint than yours, and having one more person with a slightly lower footprint is not meaningful in any way. Also keep in mind that climate change is only half of what you should be worried about, because human civilization's response to climate change is what's actually going to kill you. The rise of fascism and the eventual loss of political and ecological stability all over the world will affect your life directly, and depending on where you live, your actual course of action does not include buying better light bulbs or eating less meat and pretending like that's going to make a difference (eat less meat anyways though, you'll feel better overall). Because we are not allowed to talk about the action that would actually make a difference regarding climate change, your actual course of action should be something along the lines of learning how to grow food, and strengthening your community, making friends, and having a survival plan for when things get bad in your part of the world. The old climate change thread a few years ago was part of what got me to go back to school to get a degree so that I can move out of my doomed country and get to New Zealand (they're not guaranteed to survive but their chances are a lot better than Canada) before it's too late. friendbot2000 posted:I added this to the OP, but Climeworks is building a 3rd carbon capture facility in Italy that will take out 150 metric tons annually. So all together they are taking 1100 metric tons out of the atmosphere annually with 3 facilities: 1 full-scale(900) and two small scale (200) So 1100 tons out of an annual 35,900,000,000 tons of CO2 put into the atmosphere. e: also I didn't see this link in the thread yet, and it's a pretty important one http://fortune.com/2017/07/10/climate-change-green-house-gases/ It's about how 71% of the world's emissions from from 100 specific companies. ChairMaster fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Nov 16, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 18:48 |
|
ChairMaster posted:Does this OP mean nihilism as in "individual action is completely meaningless and we're not allowed to talk about the only actual solutions on SA" or do you mean like "AceofFlames having a nervous breakdown every 5 pages about how we're all going to die and we all try to tell him that nothing matters anyways and to just be cool"? (AoF I know you're reading this, get out of this thread and go to therapy or at least e/n or something) The nihilism rule is in reference to the breakdowns and to a lesser but not prohibitive extent on the serious hatred, people have for individual/community action as well as the general font of negativity and nothing matters that overall killed all discourse and calls to action. The goal is for this thread to be about solutions and hopefully get goons together to start working within their own communities and effecting change in a variety of ways. Combatting climate change will not be successful without individual action because without a cultural shift, unilateral actions will fail or reverse their course once people get complacent. Unilateral Policy Action AND Individual/Community action are all part of the solution. Another goal is to shift the primary tone because the old thread was frankly toxic and acerbic. I know a lot of us are internet malcontents, but it actively drove people away from the thread and that is not helpful to the cause. Also, 1100 is a drop in the bucket, sure, but a rainstorm always starts with a few drops. And buddy, it is starting to rain. I will add the report mentioned in the article as it is much more detailed than the article itself. friendbot2000 fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Nov 16, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 19:11 |
|
Admiral Ray posted:One of the better places to get money to look into things like this is the military. If you can convince generals, admirals (or their closest hangers on) that climate change will unpredictably and irreparably harm America's defense posture and your idea is part of an improved action plan to mitigate these the threats after a period of X years, enabling continued US presence in regions A, B, C while keeping expenditures below Y projections. The issue is, as ever, getting contact with them. Yeah, see here: quote:Climate change poses “immediate risks” to national security and will have broad and costly impacts on the way the US military carries out its missions, the Pentagon said in a new report on the impact of climate change released on 13 October. quote:While the Trump administration has largely rejected climate change as an issue, the Department of Defense and Congress have identified it as a major potential threat to national security.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 19:17 |
|
Oracle posted:I thought the military was already on board with the threats of climate change and it is, as ever, (the Republican-held) Congress that is brushing it off. We are seeing some exciting things happening with the Democratic Freshmen Class. AOC is making a lot of noise about climate change and she makes no sign of backing down.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 19:20 |
|
Could we add one thing from the old thread's favorite racist curmudgeon? Rime posted:
Because I'd love to see a on that.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 19:34 |
|
Floridian here, when I was polled leading to the midterms about which party I supported (Democrats) and what my most important issues were, I listed the environment as my number one issue. Big Agriculture can go gently caress itself in the rear end with a rusty jackhammer.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 19:53 |
|
Any interest in hashing out a framework? This has been on my mind because my CC thinking's pretty disorganized and it feels helpful. I've been trying to keep it small. These are intended as top-level categories. Parses the issue along lines of problem, mitigation and adaptation.
As for a general comment, as per 3(b), I think we need to start changing our culture. This is something where I see individual-action being immediately practicable. How happy could you be with 1/10th your present material affluence and with a substantially vegetarian diet? That's a question which consumption-obsessed westerners will be facing writ large very soon. People are 'doing culture' today which will be prohibitively expensive in 20 years. What will they do instead? We can get cracking on that now as individuals. Accretionist fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Nov 16, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 20:21 |
|
The Dipshit posted:Could we add one thing from the old thread's favorite racist curmudgeon? Because I'd love to see a on that. [/quote] I already toxxed for better reasons pages earlier, dipshit.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 20:30 |
|
hi sad person trying to read this thread in 8 months, enjoy all 400 pages of nihilism
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 20:30 |
|
Macasaurus posted:hi sad person trying to read this thread in 8 months, enjoy all 400 pages of nihilism Man, I hope not. I hope not. The last thread was like a freak show at the end.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 20:39 |
|
Rime posted:Because I'd love to see a on that. I already toxxed for better reasons pages earlier, dipshit. [/quote] Ah, missed it. Where's your other boot eating toxx? I can proved a pair if one or both come to pass.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 20:39 |
|
DrSunshine posted:I'm reposting a post I made in the previous thread: Your idea is already a thing, look up "enhanced weathering". The most efficient proposal seems to be just dumping lime into the oceans. This seems to be one of the most cost effective atmospheric CO2 removal schemes proposed, however even then the limitation is indeed the huge amount of e.g. calcium carbonate you'd need to remove the ungodly vast amount of CO2 we need to. Compared to e.g. direct air capture, or other CO2 capture proposals, it is probably (by far) the cheapest option, though.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 21:07 |
|
The Dipshit posted:Could we add one thing from the old thread's favorite racist curmudgeon? Because I'd love to see a on that. [/quote] Seems like a pretty safe toxx when in 2-4 years the goldfish-brained American electorate massively swings back to voting R because the other guys haven't magically fixed every single problem with society.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 21:34 |
|
I hope carbon capture will be important in the future, but at least in the near and medium term I doubt it will be of much use. This is because any carbon capture process is still going to require energy, and until we have achieved net zero emissions it will be more efficient to use that energy to replace carbon emitting sources.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 21:43 |
Ah, the morning of a new CC thread. Do we have to call it eco-fascism?
|
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 22:25 |
|
It's a little bit off-putting for sure. How about eco-Stalinism?
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 22:43 |
|
Lampsacus posted:Ah, the morning of a new CC thread. Do we have to call it eco-fascism? I am open to suggestions. I chose eco-fascism because it was a call back to some jokes in the old thread.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 23:02 |
|
Climate Change: The Greatest Show On Earth
Accretionist fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Nov 16, 2018 |
# ? Nov 16, 2018 23:17 |
|
friendbot2000 posted:I am open to suggestions. I chose eco-fascism because it was a call back to some jokes in the old thread. Some jokes just never land... or shouldn't, if they do. If you ask me, anyway.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 23:25 |
friendbot2000 posted:I am open to suggestions. I chose eco-fascism because it was a call back to some jokes in the old thread. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07223-9 If we all acted like China, we'd hit 5.1 °C. If we all acted like the EU, 3.2 °C. I've always talked about climate breakdown in questions and with hesitation. But I'm going to posit a little argument for myself. 1. Climate migration incites nationalism. 2. Nationalism gives way to fascism. 3. The mass intelligentsia are wise but placated through brain short circuiting smart devices. They see themselves as actors but their energy is wasted. Everything is said. Nothing is torched. 4. !!!! 5. Entrenchment of inequality along 19th Century European empire colonial borders. Also, The Spanish Flu Strikes Back. Lampsacus fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Nov 17, 2018 |
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 23:58 |
|
Well, environmentalism is no joke. Anzway, calling the thread eco-fascism primer is darkly humorous, because that's what you should expect to be called if you talk about this stuff in public. Don't read beyond that.
|
# ? Nov 16, 2018 23:59 |
|
I've been fighting an airport project that would threaten to destroy prime farmland and watersheds. Small stuff, but there's been dozens of airport projects that have been planned since the early 1970s, some built, some cancelled, most met with resistance of some kind. I'm fairly new to the scene since the fight's been going on for 46 years, beginning with my grandparents and their community down to me and the people still living in the area in the present day. Bit by bit more and more of the expropriated land gets shuffled into an adjacent national park, but it's a slow, grueling fight. A lot of these environmental battles end up that way.
|
# ? Nov 17, 2018 00:24 |
|
steinrokkan posted:Well, environmentalism is no joke. That's pretty much what I was going for. I have been accused of being a fascist by talking about climate change and how everything I was proposing reduces "muh freedoms".
|
# ? Nov 17, 2018 00:39 |
|
Morbus posted:Your idea is already a thing, look up "enhanced weathering". The most efficient proposal seems to be just dumping lime into the oceans. This seems to be one of the most cost effective atmospheric CO2 removal schemes proposed, however even then the limitation is indeed the huge amount of e.g. calcium carbonate you'd need to remove the ungodly vast amount of CO2 we need to. Ah, I thought it was. I just didn't know what the term was! Thanks!
|
# ? Nov 17, 2018 00:54 |
|
Dreylad posted:I've been fighting an airport project that would threaten to destroy prime farmland and watersheds. Small stuff, but there's been dozens of airport projects that have been planned since the early 1970s, some built, some cancelled, most met with resistance of some kind. This sounds like a good goon project my friend. You want to write up some info on it so I can post it to the community initiative section of the OP.
|
# ? Nov 17, 2018 00:58 |
|
friendbot2000 posted:This sounds like a good goon project my friend. You want to write up some info on it so I can post it to the community initiative section of the OP. Yeah, I'll try to write up something longer soon.
|
# ? Nov 17, 2018 01:15 |
|
|
# ? May 3, 2024 00:44 |
|
US groundwater reserves are depleting faster than expected. quote:The U.S. fresh groundwater supply is depleting faster than originally thought due to stresses to critical resources from both the top down and the bottom up, says a USask-led research study involving colleagues in Arizona and California.
|
# ? Nov 17, 2018 01:27 |