silence7

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 5 points 11 hours ago

They care enough to do things like buy properties in cooler countries so they can move to them after making Saudi Arabia uninhabitable.

59
submitted 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net
 

Thanks to the relentless burning of fossil fuels, we are — right now, in real time — departing the Holocene epoch, the Goldilocks zone of relative climate stability that enabled us to build the world as we know it over the past 12,000 years. We must recognize this moment for what it is: the beginning of a new era of civilizational retreat, contraction and consolidation. Call it the post-Holocene.

For context, wildfire has been quite rare in the northeast US for the past few hundred years.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 6 points 16 hours ago (6 children)

We're not quite that bad right now; efforts already taken probably dropped it to something more like 3°C of warming by 2100 with further warming thereafter.

 

Archived copies of the article:

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Here's a gift link you can edit into your post so that (almost) everybody get seamless access to the article.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, wind and solar seem to be able to go for 50+ years too. The main reason they're not doing that so far is that newer installations can kick out more electricity (and money) in the same footprint.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

Right, but nuclear remains far more expensive than wind and solar, which is why almost no new nuclear gets built.

I'll also note that a chunk of the data is from 2007 and 2008, and the price (and greenhouse gas emissions associated with) both wind and solar have declined markedly since then.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 15 points 5 days ago

He hasn't promised to be true to his oath of office.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Yeah, it's roughly at a peak, with the first actual drop seeming more likely to happen next year, rather than this year.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The point isn't to take advice; it's to push responsibility and blame onto somebody else.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The main problem with carbon removal is that it's expensive, and removing it doesn't produce a product you can sell. So in practice, doing something like what you describe within a generation requires a system of taxation which absorbs 40% or so of total economic output, and uses it to sequester carbon. That seems, to put it mildly, politically very difficult.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 1 points 6 days ago (3 children)

If we actually cut emissions to zero, we can expect to see the Impact within a lifetime to be substantially limited. It's not that far off if we actually succeed.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 23 points 6 days ago (2 children)

If you lived in a swing state, you probably got multiple texts and phone calls from Democrats and other left-leaning groups, and very likely somebody knocking at your door too. Shifted the outcome by something like 3 percentage points.

view more: next ›