Climate Change: Where every storm is Perfect

That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guyRegistered User regular
edited December 2019 in Debate and/or Discourse
In keeping with the movie themed thread titles, the climate change thread is back. In the last thread I think we were able to establish a few points where we all agree. Climate change is bad. It's being caused by humans. Currently humans are doing little to abate the anthropocene extinction event currently going on. There is some small hope. New renewable energy generation has become cheaper to build than new fossil fuel generation in some industrializing economies like India and China. Electric vehicles are set to vastly displace internal combustion engine vehicles while enjoying the benefits of cheap clean renewable energy. Humans were once standing at a knife's edge. Now we've tipped over and are carrining downhill into extinction. It's up to the new generation to see just how bad it's going to be and just how much we can negate the effects.

camo_sig.png
That_Guy on
taliosfalcon
«13456731

Posts

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    These days I'm less concerned about climate change then I am about the possible insect die-off happening. Most models of an apocalyptic civilizational collapse don't come from a single event, but many simultaneous events which eventually overwhelm the ability to adapt.

    The insect die-off is one of those things that's felt suspiciously underreported, because who cares about insects right? It feels like something happening that means we could see some pretty dramatic shifts in the viability of crops on a mass-scale - but over a timespan which is problematic, 10-20 years or so.

    And that feels really problematic - because one of the things which has kept us going the way we are for so long is our massive overproduction of food. The fact that starvation is political, not resource constrained is something we've had in our favor for so long that the reaction of western civilization to actual possible food-shortages does not feel like it will go down well.

    MrVyngaardBliss 101thatassemblyguyGnome-InterruptusL Ron HowardKetBradispatch.oMegaMekEddyTransporterLord_Asmodeus
  • OrcaOrca Registered User regular
    Food shortages are a great way to get revolutions.

    When you can't feed your kids, you tend to get pretty pissed off.

    Stabbity StyleEddyTransporter
  • SoggybiscuitSoggybiscuit At the edge of spacetime lies a path with no end.Registered User regular
    These days I'm less concerned about climate change then I am about the possible insect die-off happening. Most models of an apocalyptic civilizational collapse don't come from a single event, but many simultaneous events which eventually overwhelm the ability to adapt.

    The insect die-off is one of those things that's felt suspiciously underreported, because who cares about insects right? It feels like something happening that means we could see some pretty dramatic shifts in the viability of crops on a mass-scale - but over a timespan which is problematic, 10-20 years or so.

    And that feels really problematic - because one of the things which has kept us going the way we are for so long is our massive overproduction of food. The fact that starvation is political, not resource constrained is something we've had in our favor for so long that the reaction of western civilization to actual possible food-shortages does not feel like it will go down well.

    What's causing this? Massive use of pesticides from crop production?

    Steam - Synthetic Violence | XBOX Live - Cannonfuse | PSN - CastleBravo | Twitch - SoggybiscuitPA
  • tynictynic PICNIC BADASS Registered User, ClubPA regular
    Bunch of things - pesticides yes, but also loss of habitat, loss of potable running water in sensitive ecosystems, changes in season lengths and intensity interfering with ancient breeding strategies and evolved lifecycles, etc. One of the big problems in this area is it's not just one thing, and a lot of it isn't even fully understood. Personal anecdote: my research team has been going to southern Africa every year for at least a decade. We're seeing less active termite mounds every time. Is this part of a long natural cycle of growth and retreat, or is it an effect of less annual rainfall due to climate shifts? Or both? Or something else? Bloody hard to say.

    Some interesting books across a wide spectrum of climate change related areas that I've recently come across:
    Firestorm, by Edward struzik
    Extreme cities, by Ashley Dawson
    Seeds on ice, by Cary Fowler
    Storming the wall, by Todd Millar
    Designing climate solutions, by Hal Harvey

    Gnome-InterruptusHacksawJoolanderBrainleechEddy
  • JepheryJephery Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/03/26/blow-climate-coal-plants-emitted-more-than-ever
    “The growth in fossils is still greater than all the increases in renewables,” Jackson said, adding that few countries are living up to the pledges they made as part of the Paris climate accord. “What’s discouraging is that emissions in the U.S. and Europe are going up, too. Someone has to decrease their emissions significantly for us to have any hope of meeting the Paris commitments.”

    2018 emissions increased overall, and coal energy generation was one of the main factors in the increase.

    I've harped on this issue before, but renewables and natural gas growth in advanced economies are simply displacing coal use to developing economies. Since coal is a globally traded commodity, as the advanced economies use less coal it will get cheaper and more accessible for developing economies.

    Developing economies need to develop a sizeable baseload before building renewable sources. They're not going to get nuclear power plants because of proliferation fears and their high upfront cost. Liquid natural gas infrustructure is still undeveloped. Thus the growth of coal use.

    https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/05/lamu-island-coal-plant-kenya-africa-climate/

    Jephery on
    }
    "Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
    That_GuytynicGnome-InterruptusL Ron Howard
  • manwiththemachinegunmanwiththemachinegun METAL GEAR?! Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    manwiththemachinegun on
  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    I don't think "If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway" is the appropriate reaction to Climate Change, here. I didn't quite understand all of your post, but like... this is preventable. It's not like a gamma ray burst from space.

    PA HotS Group
    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
    JaysonFourKetBraMegaMekskyknytMagell
  • HeartlashHeartlash Registered User regular
    Nothing in this debate pisses me off as much as coal romanticism. It is the least efficient form of energy production from an emissions standpoint and one of the most brutal to harvest and process. I have total sympathy for the people who are stuck in the lower echelons of that sector but the insane political argument that we are "helping" them by "bringing back coal" is infuriating.

    Anyway, despite how insane the current administration has been on the subject, the EIA has remained an excellent source for energy statistics.

    My indie mobile gaming studio: Elder Aeons
    Our first game is now available for free on Google Play: Frontier: Isle of the Seven Gods
    Gnome-InterruptuskimeJepheryPhoenix-DelectricitylikesmeL Ron Howardoverride367JoolanderJaysonFourCalicaKetBraMegaMekStabbity StyleLord_Asmodeus
  • JepheryJephery Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    Yeah we don't just have to switch to renewables, we have to stop pulling fossil fuels out of the ground, since even if we don't use them, someone else will buy it from us to use themselves. However economically that is like cutting a leg off.

    Jephery on
    }
    "Orkses never lose a battle. If we win we win, if we die we die fightin so it don't count. If we runs for it we don't die neither, cos we can come back for annuver go, see!".
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    humans aren't going to go extinct

    most of humanity will likely die off, sure, but as a species we are absolutely one of the most adaptable ones

    "we" will likely still be "here" when the sun goes nova

    not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
    Gnome-InterruptustynicKetBraSkeithKayne Red RobeMegaMekjkylefulton
  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    The world has plenty of copper and sand. We aren't at any risk of running out of the materials needed for renewable energy production. You don't NEED rare materials to produce solar power. It just makes it easier. We may never crack sustainable fusion. We have the technology NOW to power the entire world with solar. It's been estimated that to power the entire US with solar it would cost around 20 trillion dollars and require around 21,250 square miles of land. Here's the thing though. 40,223 square miles of federal land is already leased out to oil companies. If we had spent the war on terror's $6 trillion on renewable energy we'd already be already be a 1/3rd of the way to being totally renewable. Redirecting oil subsidies to renewable energy would easily get us the rest of the way there over the next decade or so. The thing is, no one has any interest in REALLY changing the current infrastructure. It's attitudes like "we'll have fusion in 10 years" are prevending real change from occurring.

    A GRB, asteroid or supervolcano are HIGHLY unlikely to happen in the near future and we can't do anything about them anyway. We can do something about climate change NOW. It's just plane wrong to equate manmade climate change to natural disasters like that. Climate change is far from inevitable and can be prevented.

    No one is seriously suggesting we wipe out cows. Stop being a silly goose. Moving from a system of factory farms to lab grown meat, however absolutely will prevent a lot of extra pollution. It's a lot easier to bolt a gas capture system to the vent of a lab than it is to the ass of a cow.

    camo_sig.png
  • manwiththemachinegunmanwiththemachinegun METAL GEAR?! Registered User regular
    bowen wrote: »
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    humans aren't going to go extinct

    most of humanity will likely die off, sure, but as a species we are absolutely one of the most adaptable ones

    "we" will likely still be "here" when the sun goes nova

    The point is finding a middle ground for spreading the message beyond, "we're all going to die in 50 years" which yes, I just read in the local paper from a high school op-ed, and pushing for more sensible tech in our current political grid lock. I think Europe has the head start on that front for sure.

  • HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    I think we can all agree that the child terrified of the grim future they didn't ask for may have engaged in hyperbole

    VishNubkimePhoenix-DGnome-Interruptus38thDoetynicFencingsaxKetBraL Ron Howardoverride367JoolanderHacksawSkeithbowenJaysonFourRawkking GoodguyKayne Red RobeTofystedethMrVyngaardStabbity Styleemp123MagellHappy Little MachineadejaanLord_Asmodeus
  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    Maybe don't weigh teenager opinion essays the same as other sources :P

    PA HotS Group
    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
    tynicFencingsaxKetBraL Ron HowardSmrtnikIncenjucarJoolanderHacksawEncGnizmoJaysonFourTofystedethMrVyngaardStabbity Styleemp123Happy Little MachineLord_Asmodeus
  • HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    I'd say human extinction from a nuclear war caused by climate change is a real possibility.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
    kimePhoenix-DEvil MultifariousredxCaptain InertiaMild ConfusionMaijinamuroTofystedethMegaMekStabbity Styleskyknytemp123BandableLord_Asmodeus
  • HefflingHeffling No Pic EverRegistered User regular
    bowen wrote: »
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    humans aren't going to go extinct

    most of humanity will likely die off, sure, but as a species we are absolutely one of the most adaptable ones

    "we" will likely still be "here" when the sun goes nova

    The point is finding a middle ground for spreading the message beyond, "we're all going to die in 50 years" which yes, I just read in the local paper from a high school op-ed, and pushing for more sensible tech in our current political grid lock. I think Europe has the head start on that front for sure.

    I don't think "We're all going to die in 50 years" is a sellable message, because the Baby Boomers taught me that the counter argument is "Fuck you, got mine. I'll be dead by the time that happens."

    If a movement doesn't have someone that can sit down opposite those in a position of power and strike a deal, how can that movement achieve success?
    FencingsaxJaysonFourCommander ZoomNyysjanRingoRaiju
  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    bowen wrote: »
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    humans aren't going to go extinct

    most of humanity will likely die off, sure, but as a species we are absolutely one of the most adaptable ones

    "we" will likely still be "here" when the sun goes nova

    The point is finding a middle ground for spreading the message beyond, "we're all going to die in 50 years" which yes, I just read in the local paper from a high school op-ed, and pushing for more sensible tech in our current political grid lock. I think Europe has the head start on that front for sure.

    No one is suggesting that we are all going to die in 50 years. You seem to be the only one waxing hyperbolic right now. In all seriousness though, a massive amount of currently inhabited land is going to be uninhabitable in less than geological time frames. Not just from rising sea levels but from general erosion and flooding due to increased heavy and severe storm activity. Once enough sea ice melts away, all the land ice it's holding back will fall into the ocean causing a (geologically speaking) very rapid rise in sea levels and loss of salinity. All that extra fresh water will cause ocean circulation to stop and all the warm water (and air) will stop flowing away from the equator, causing most of Europe to freeze. On geological time scales the earth will be fine but most of humanity won't survive.

    camo_sig.png
  • VishNubVishNub Registered User regular
    Many millions to billions dead isn’t extinction but it’s also not good.

    HonkbowenEncTofystedethdispatch.oMegaMekskyknytRingoMagellBrovid Hasselsmof
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    Heffling wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    humans aren't going to go extinct

    most of humanity will likely die off, sure, but as a species we are absolutely one of the most adaptable ones

    "we" will likely still be "here" when the sun goes nova

    The point is finding a middle ground for spreading the message beyond, "we're all going to die in 50 years" which yes, I just read in the local paper from a high school op-ed, and pushing for more sensible tech in our current political grid lock. I think Europe has the head start on that front for sure.

    I don't think "We're all going to die in 50 years" is a sellable message, because the Baby Boomers taught me that the counter argument is "Fuck you, got mine. I'll be dead by the time that happens."

    I'm fairly sure in the next 10-20 years the baby boomers are going to have a bit of a revelation that the millenials will also be writing the history books.

    Not quite sure what that end of life crisis will look like, but I'm expecting at least a bunch of articles on the importance of understanding how they had no choice or something.

    SmrtnikBurnageFencingsaxGnome-InterruptusEncKayne Red RobeCommander ZoomKamarjkylefultonLord_Asmodeus
  • manwiththemachinegunmanwiththemachinegun METAL GEAR?! Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    That_Guy wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    humans aren't going to go extinct

    most of humanity will likely die off, sure, but as a species we are absolutely one of the most adaptable ones

    "we" will likely still be "here" when the sun goes nova

    The point is finding a middle ground for spreading the message beyond, "we're all going to die in 50 years" which yes, I just read in the local paper from a high school op-ed, and pushing for more sensible tech in our current political grid lock. I think Europe has the head start on that front for sure.

    No one is suggesting that we are all going to die in 50 years. You seem to be the only one waxing hyperbolic right now. In all seriousness though, a massive amount of currently inhabited land is going to be uninhabitable in less than geological time frames. Not just from rising sea levels but from general erosion and flooding due to increased heavy and severe storm activity. Once enough sea ice melts away, all the land ice it's holding back will fall into the ocean causing a (geologically speaking) very rapid rise in sea levels and loss of salinity. All that extra fresh water will cause ocean circulation to stop and all the warm water (and air) will stop flowing away from the equator, causing most of Europe to freeze. On geological time scales the earth will be fine but most of humanity won't survive.

    Your first post literally contains the phrase, "Humans were once standing at a knife's edge. Now we've tipped over and are carrining downhill into extinction."

    What interests me is the tech and innovation side, because I found out about cool companies and techs like carbon storage that I wouldn't have heard of otherwise.

    manwiththemachinegun on
    Lanlaorn
  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    That_Guy wrote: »
    bowen wrote: »
    Extinction is such an overused word it completely shuts off my ability to engage in these kinds of discussions.

    In terms of "human" extinction, we simply haven't seen an industrial scale response to some of the problems that are likely to come. People may not like Blade Runner bug protein farms, but you can be assured if that was the "only" option, people would do it.

    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    All of this stuff is concerning, but so is, you know a Yellowstone eruption or gamma ray burst that flips out all organic life in the solar system like a switch. If it happens, there's no use worrying about it anyway.

    Unless of course we engineer a virus which kills all cows, that will surely save us... (no I'm not letting that horrible idea go from the last thread).

    humans aren't going to go extinct

    most of humanity will likely die off, sure, but as a species we are absolutely one of the most adaptable ones

    "we" will likely still be "here" when the sun goes nova

    The point is finding a middle ground for spreading the message beyond, "we're all going to die in 50 years" which yes, I just read in the local paper from a high school op-ed, and pushing for more sensible tech in our current political grid lock. I think Europe has the head start on that front for sure.

    No one is suggesting that we are all going to die in 50 years. You seem to be the only one waxing hyperbolic right now. In all seriousness though, a massive amount of currently inhabited land is going to be uninhabitable in less than geological time frames. Not just from rising sea levels but from general erosion and flooding due to increased heavy and severe storm activity. Once enough sea ice melts away, all the land ice it's holding back will fall into the ocean causing a (geologically speaking) very rapid rise in sea levels and loss of salinity. All that extra fresh water will cause ocean circulation to stop and all the warm water (and air) will stop flowing away from the equator, causing most of Europe to freeze. On geological time scales the earth will be fine but most of humanity won't survive.

    Your first post literally contains the phrase, "Humans were once standing at a knife's edge. Now we've tipped over and are carrining downhill into extinction."

    What interests me is the tech and innovation side, because I found out about cool companies and techs like carbon storage that I wouldn't have heard of otherwise.

    I'll admit I was was being a bit dramatic there. If we don't do anything we are facing possible extinction, though. Not in 50 years, but certainly in less than geological timescales.

    camo_sig.png
  • HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    I think there is also a real possibility that we are underestimating how interdependant our world has become and how that could cause a catastrophic collapse. Massive disasters in one place could trigger shortages of some vital piece of modern society that then causes a shortage of something else and so on. Right now there is enough time between events that we can rebuild but if we start getting historic storms every single year? Or an economic collapse in the developed world could mean all the GM crops stop being produced and then what happens? Do we have the systems in place to avoid global famine and switch back to natural crops if that happens?

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
    SleepDoodmannKaroz
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    I think there is also a real possibility that we are underestimating how interdependant our world has become and how that could cause a catastrophic collapse. Massive disasters in one place could trigger shortages of some vital piece of modern society that then causes a shortage of something else and so on. Right now there is enough time between events that we can rebuild but if we start getting historic storms every single year? Or an economic collapse in the developed world could mean all the GM crops stop being produced and then what happens? Do we have the systems in place to avoid global famine and switch back to natural crops if that happens?

    No, and add on to that every type of Malady/epidemic/weather-caused natural disaster and any type of atrocity humans have ever inflicted upon themselves will be inflicted all at once with magnitudes more intensity and frequency than ever before.

    The conservatives in government aren’t going to pivot to “how do we fix climate change” once they can no longer deny it. Their position will be “who do we need to keep out/kill to maintain our in group’s standard of living/place in society?”

    SmrtnikMrVyngaardNyysjandispatch.oMegaMekskyknytRingoKamar
  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    VishNub wrote: »
    Many millions to billions dead isn’t extinction but it’s also not good.

    I agree with this.

    PSN: Honkalot
    manwiththemachinegunJaysonFourBlackDragon480L Ron HowardMrVyngaardRingo
  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    Hey y'all want some definitive proof that things are not normal and only getting worse? How about the fact that the northernmost town in the world, Longyearben in Norway, is warming up faster than anywhere else on earth to the point that it's melting the permafrost, otherwise known as that ice which has always stayed frozen and was in fact so reliably frozen that all the houses were built on it. And that ice is now melting at a rapid rate, which is doing everything from avalanches to starving the local fauna.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/26/europe/longyearbyen-doomsday-vault-climate-change-intl/index.html

    Even better news, just outside town is the Svalbard Global Seed Vault, which carries copies of the world's crop seeds with the intent of restoration after a catastrophe. That vault is in grave danger from the warming temperatures as well, and if it goes then a lot of rare and endangered forms of crops go with it.

    camo_sig2.png
    PSN: AuthorFrost
    mageofstorm.png
  • manwiththemachinegunmanwiththemachinegun METAL GEAR?! Registered User regular
    This is why you build in redundancies into your doomsday planning. I was aware of the vault, but only one?

  • SmrtnikSmrtnik job boli zub Registered User regular
    This is why you build in redundancies into your doomsday planning. I was aware of the vault, but only one?

    Who's going to pay for it? Would be the first thing shut down in the US in a Republican government.

    Norway's got oil money and brains.

    steam_sig.png
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    I think there is also a real possibility that we are underestimating how interdependant our world has become and how that could cause a catastrophic collapse. Massive disasters in one place could trigger shortages of some vital piece of modern society that then causes a shortage of something else and so on. Right now there is enough time between events that we can rebuild but if we start getting historic storms every single year? Or an economic collapse in the developed world could mean all the GM crops stop being produced and then what happens? Do we have the systems in place to avoid global famine and switch back to natural crops if that happens?

    Well, historic storms just fucking wrecking shit is kind of a symptom of using as cheap as possible building techniques and materials.

    If we started burying things in conduits and building buildings out of things other than cheap wood and plastic they would definitely survive 70mph winds. But that's expensive, and that's why we don't do it.

    Not that I'm defending anything or anyone here. It's garbage and we need to work on sequestering as much fucking carbon as we can because the sun's only getting brighter and hotter.

    not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
  • HevachHevach Registered User regular
    Alternate energy is its own can of worms, since as I understand it, there may not be enough rare earth metals to create the kind of power we'll need in 50 years. Which means either a return to Fission or hopefully Fusion.

    Supply isn't really a problem. Rare earth minerals aren't particularly scarce. The US has closed mines on deposits that could meet global demand for a century or more, and parts of Canada probably have even more. China and Africa have capacity to expand production as well.

    The real issue is that mining in general is environmentally unconscionable and rare earth mining is the worst kind. Mining the stuff in a safe and clean way is possible, but so expensive that it's just not feasible while China will turn a blind eye to giving millions of people cancer and so many mineral exporters of Africa either don't give a shit or don't actually have enough control within their own borders to enforce regulations on mines that are being run by a mix of local warlords and foreign corporations.

    This is why there's commercial interest in asteroid mining even with none of the engineering in place yet. Because reaching our monkey fingers across the sky to grab a primordial smudge of cosmic leftovers might be more economically viable than cleaning the fuck up after ourselves.

    HefflingtynicFencingsaxTofystedeth
  • SoggybiscuitSoggybiscuit At the edge of spacetime lies a path with no end.Registered User regular
    edited March 2019
    I understand why they use rare earths (mechanically and electrically simple, easier to design), but you can absolutely build generators without them {see here, page 22}; most (if not all) modern generators in modern power generation facilities do not use permanent magnets in the rotors of their generators. This is long-solved problem.

    Soggybiscuit on
    Steam - Synthetic Violence | XBOX Live - Cannonfuse | PSN - CastleBravo | Twitch - SoggybiscuitPA
  • ZekZek Registered User regular
    I think arguing about whether technical extinction is going to happen is kind of splitting hairs. It's possible that modern civilization will come to an end, permanently. Right now we have the technology to cope with quite a lot of climate change, but the political instability that would be created as a result would be truly devastating and possibly irreparable if nukes get involved.

  • HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    Find the shiniest asteroid in our neighbourhood, fly some rockets over to it, clamp the rockets on and crash the asteroid into the planet there rare earth forever right in one place, more like common earth

  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    Hobnail wrote: »
    Find the shiniest asteroid in our neighbourhood, fly some rockets over to it, clamp the rockets on and crash the asteroid into the planet there rare earth forever right in one place, more like common earth

    Let's fight climate change by pelting the earth with asteroids. Brilliant! Next we will tackle the problem of house fires by setting ourselves on fire instead.

    camo_sig.png
  • HobnailHobnail Registered User regular
    Just the one asteroid! Crash it where nobody lives like Antarctica fuck those penguins

  • 38thDoe38thDoe lets never be stupid again wait lets always be stupid foreverRegistered User regular
    I mean, a dust cloud would cool the earth off.

    Less globally apocalyptic, but I think the last time Krakatoa exploded it cooled the earth several degrees for several years.

    Kayne Red RobeDoodmannRingo
  • bowenbowen How you doin'? Registered User regular
    38thDoe wrote: »
    I mean, a dust cloud would cool the earth off.

    Less globally apocalyptic, but I think the last time Krakatoa exploded it cooled the earth several degrees for several years.

    I mean we can just detonate several nukes and kick up dust if we want to go that route.

    not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
  • That_GuyThat_Guy I don't wanna be that guy Registered User regular
    For an asteroid to kick up enough dust to cause global cooling, it would have to be massive enough to cause utterly catastrophic damage and a global firestorm on impact. Anything short of a global catastrophe sized asteroid will just make global warming worse. Mainly though the release go greenhouse gases and the sheer thermal mass of the impact.

    camo_sig.png
    bowen38thDoeHacksawKaroz
  • VishNubVishNub Registered User regular
    Also iirc asteroids usually trigger a bunch of volcanoes so there’s some more co2

  • ArtereisArtereis Registered User regular
    That_Guy wrote: »
    Hobnail wrote: »
    Find the shiniest asteroid in our neighbourhood, fly some rockets over to it, clamp the rockets on and crash the asteroid into the planet there rare earth forever right in one place, more like common earth

    Let's fight climate change by pelting the earth with asteroids. Brilliant! Next we will tackle the problem of house fires by setting ourselves on fire instead.

    They do it for wildfires.

  • [Expletive deleted][Expletive deleted] The mediocre doctor NorwayRegistered User regular
    Hobnail wrote: »
    Just the one asteroid! Crash it where nobody lives like Antarctica fuck those penguins

    Well, I don't want to kink-shame…

    Sic transit gloria mundi.
Sign In or Register to comment.