World News
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
Once again, when we talk about geoengineering we are focusing on blocking the suns rays instead of removing CO2 from the air. How is blocking out the sun going to help with ocean acidification? That's caused by CO2 dissolving in the water, not by global temperatures. Every fucking time. Do these people never think?
While this terrifies me it is also probably the only way to actually get something done. The idea that we as a species will give up quality of life to cool the planet is absurd. We as rich nations won't and developing nations can't afford to give up the edge it gives them to continue at the current rate.
Also this will give the conspiracy theorists something to tout as a win because they think we're doing this anyway. :)
The EU & US are gonna fight the sun before they fight capitalism. Every year they announce X billions of investment, and in the following years nobody even remembers where all that money went. Then they repeat the process, increasing the numbers each time. Isn't this the peak of neoliberalism?
We really are fucked aren't ?
FINALLY!!
It's the only solution we could possibly execute on, the longer we take to figure that out the worse it is for everyone.
Sadly I think you are right. We have to stop the warming or slow it down somehow. Considering we are never going to stop the wheels of civilization, people won't stop driving, won't stop eating meat, and otherwise won't accept a decrease in their standard of living, it leaves us no alternatives.
We either geoengineer our way out of this mess, or we die.
The climate crisis is not because of the wheels of civilisation or because that or this, it's because of capitalism. There are alternatives, but these alternatives hurt shareholders profits, so they are not discussed.
I mean, maybe, if that makes you feel better (because the argument is purely an exercise in epistemology).
Fact is, humans didn't need to invent capitalism to collapse whole ecosystems (Easter Island is often brought up as an example here). I don't think other economical systems would fare much better, to be honest. I think what we see is the result of individualistic societies, of generally placing comfort and immediate needs above sustainability, of being organized in competing tribes (who prefer to be above the neighbour than higher with them), and of playing with a science we barely understand as an amplifier.
The climate crisis is not because of the wheels of civilisation or because that or this, it’s because of capitalism.
We need to be careful and smart, but yeah, this is the only way out, better we start now.
We can cut down on meat and gas cars too, the low-hanging fruit, but pretending we're all somehow going back to hunting-gathering while sustaining our current population is some kind of delusional fantasy that only comes from drinking too much LSD.
This thread's take is pretty naive. The topic of geoengineering predates the 80's if not longer, and is a typical case of Tragedy of the Commons.
Let's suppose, for the sake of the argument, that the technical side of the issue (how, how much, to what extend) is solved. Now we have our best scientists planning accurately what to spread where and in which amount to make the planet cool to its pre-industrial levels. This is a gigantic effort, and mobilizes all countries on Earth. The perfect ground for some countries to think "well, if I spray X% less, my climate will be milder, I will outgrow the neighbours' country crops and provide a better future for my people". Sabotages are discovered, pledges are broken, wars are fought.
Anticipating on that, undisputed World Leader Country X plans for everyone everywhere all at the same time for what it consider is only fair: maintain the status quo. And proceeds unilaterally with the plan. Sabotages are made, wars are fought.
Back to today's world. We currently can't collectively solve climate change by reducing emissions, although the course of action is dead-simple, because millennia of geopolitics and self-serving policies get in the way. The technical ability to geo-engineer the problem away could be nothing more than more complex way to shout ourselves in the foot, faster and louder.
So you're saying we should do nothing, or?
I expect we will end up doing it anyway (because no other option), so better research it more so we have better models, but fundamentally it won't solve the core issue.
Well the wildfires did a great job of preventing those pesky solar rays of reaching the earth