this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2024
506 points (97.9% liked)

World News

39210 readers
1646 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Don't think I need to summarize this one. This is bad news for everyone.

(page 3) 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 89 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The Earth will survive and the humans will get what they deserve.

[–] [email protected] 68 points 1 week ago (19 children)

Millions of species will go down with us, some already have been relagated to extinction by our actions.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Huh. That's oddly freeing

"Oh we're all fucked guaranteed. The stress is gone"

I mean, still gonna be for eco measures and such, but it's like a weight is off my shoulders in terms of worry

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s not freeing. We may have locked in some really bad changes but it can always get worse. It more critical than ever to get a handle on our green house emissions

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It looks really important but dam that site is cancer on mobile.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 120 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Basically it's too late to stop the process. Even if we switched to renewables entirely, there will be a lag. That lag is now in a positive feedback loop.

[–] [email protected] 132 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yeah like the science community was saying 10-15 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 week ago (3 children)

If only we knew about this 50 years ago, surely we would have done something!

Big Oil: side eye Muppet meme

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 75 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I remember some of the early research showing this when I was in college in the late 90s/early 00s. It's mostly following the worst-case scenario models from the time, except 50 - 80 years ahead of schedule.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Whether you can risk it or can't. Its time to disobey our leaders. They dont care. They've built protections for themselves. They plan on feeding us to the storms.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 week ago (2 children)

There will be no protection or escape from the environmental changes we'll be facing, this is not something you can just wait out in a bunker.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yep, they'll let the climate kill all of us. Because they won't truly be living either down there. I'm sure all the training courses for guard loyalty in the world won't actually do shit when you're physically down in a bunker without hopes of coming out.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Yeah. Anarchy isn't the coordination we need.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

So, what does this all mean for us? It means we have even less time to get our act together. Reducing emissions isn’t just a good idea — it’s crucial.

I don't think this will motivate countries to dramatically increase emissions reduction efforts, but I think it will motivate countries to begin geoengineering. Geoengineering is cheaper and easier than rapid emissions reduction, and the results are more immediate. Yes, it doesn't solve the core problem, which is the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, but it treats the symptom, albeit temporarily. Why put a lot of time, money, and effort into fixing the core problem when you can spend comparatively less time, money, and effort just treating the symptom? Then you can just pretend the core problem doesn't exist and go about business as usual.

Edit: sorry, I should have added the /s.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

You tried, but your tone and wording was off. Some people would state all that fully believing things can continue and we'll tech out way out of trouble. And we WILL absolutely jump to geoengineering to try and preserve status quo, cost or not. The alternative is to change society dramatically, and that won't happen voluntarily. And the great news is once we start geoengineering, we dare not stop because the reaction will spike things even worse.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Geoengineering is cheaper and easier than rapid emissions reduction

I don't know if your whole comment is sarcasm, but every part of this statement is wrong. We are in the very, very early stages of developing the technologies needed for the level of geoengineering required to mitigate what we have already done to the environment. To roll it out to the levels needed would be far more difficult and expensive that converting our entire way of life to renewables, which should really say how hard and expensive it would be given how utterly daunting of a task full conversion to renewables is.

Now, putting in token investment and paying lip service to geoengineering, that's cheaper and easier than switching to renewables. But that's not even treating the symptoms. That's just your standard con game against the broader population to try to manipulate the conversation.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes, it was sarcasm. But, I think the push for solar geoengineering, or as some people are calling it "solar radiation management" is coming.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Geoengineering is the most expensive, least effective choice. It risks making things worse and it risks triggering conflict over local effects. It’s not a good idea.

… but it’s starting to look like a necessary one, because we keep screwing up even more

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

At this point we should be exercising all options.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

Yet all too many still don’t see the need and were actually backsliding. wtf, fellow humans?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

To roll it out to the levels needed would be far more difficult and expensive that converting our entire way of life to renewables

The cost of geoengineering solutions has been estimated to be less than $5b/yr, which includes R&D. In other words, this is something that the government of New York City (annual budget: >$100b) could easily do alone without any international support, even in the face of significant opposition.

In contrast, ending fossil fuel use requires significant international cooperation and is regularly stymied by opposing interests. NYC obviously cannot do it by itself.

So from a pragmatic perspective, geoengineering is definitely the easiest solution. In fact IMO the lack of progress on emission reduction makes it inevitable, at some point some country will weigh the risks of climate change and take matters into its own hands.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

at some point some country will weigh the risks of climate change and take matters into its own hands.

Yeah, I could see that happening. Maybe even the US. Maybe Elon Musk reads a Twitter thread about geoengineering, decides it's the solution to warming, starts a company called GeoX and convinces Trump and the Republicans to give him and GeoX $5 billion a year, he buys a bunch of jets, fills them with sulfur dioxide and has them fart out a bunch of it around the Arctic every year. GeoX stocks soar, Musk becomes the first trillionaire, and the US federal government has added only a trivial amount to its already vast debt total. It almost doesn't matter if it works or not.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

I don't think you realize what a collapsed ocean current means for us. This is existential, not business as usual. Anything we do from here on out that isn't in service of stopping this is signing our species death warrant.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

I'm pretty sure that's already signed, let's be real, nothing is going to happen, we're fucked

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Haha fricking euros enjoying their moderate climate - wait until they find out what’s real Midwest winter is like. And they want to take my truck and my gas stove? Eff them.

/too many conservatives probably

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ah don't worry, Texas will get Saharan weather in exchange.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›