TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

We Need to Stop Pretending we can Limit Global Warming to 1.5°C

91 点作者 kitkat_new将近 3 年前

24 条评论

tejohnso将近 3 年前
&gt; Rather than collapse into despair, getting real about 1.5°C should mean we are able to hold open a space of grounded, realistic optimism.<p>So what does that realistic optimism look like? &quot;We&#x27;re never gonna make 1.5, we&#x27;ve already blown past it, hundreds of millions of people are going to suffer and die because of the choices of the wealthy. But, on the bright side...&quot;<p>I don&#x27;t think many people, especially politicians, can honestly be realistic AND optimistic. You can&#x27;t put optimism into this conversation until you&#x27;ve first had acceptance. And you can&#x27;t have acceptance until you have at least understood the significance of the situation and probably gone through some kind of grieving process. We&#x27;re way off from that. People are still booking international vacations and buying brand new full size SUVs to do groceries.<p>And there&#x27;s no need to collapse into despair either.
评论 #32044338 未加载
评论 #32044356 未加载
评论 #32044482 未加载
评论 #32045352 未加载
评论 #32046838 未加载
评论 #32044315 未加载
评论 #32046019 未加载
评论 #32046238 未加载
Mildlypolite将近 3 年前
&quot;Overshoot<p>The world will not end when we warm beyond 1.5°C. What will happen is that more people will suffer and die along with countless other species we share the biosphere with. Some tipping elements in the climate system may be activated such as the disintegration of Greenland and Western Antarctic Ice Sheets.&quot;<p>There are other feedback loops which can be activated like the permafrost one. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thearcticinstitute.org&#x2F;global-carbon-budget-permafrost-feedback-loops-arctic&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thearcticinstitute.org&#x2F;global-carbon-budget-perm...</a>
papaver-somnamb将近 3 年前
I&#x27;m going to make some predictions, bold, dystopian predictions yet ones I feel at least rather confident in coming to be.<p>1) Political action will stay under the threshold necessary for real change on human behaviors to realize limits on human-caused warming. We&#x27;re gonna heat the planet and politicians will remain anti-aligned and selfishly focused on partisan&#x2F;regional &#x2F;short-term gains with the support of their votership.<p>2) As we heat and resources exhaust, some populations are going to wither, some will adapt, and some will attempt to migrate towards cooler regions (the poles). This will cause political strife. As one particular example, draw a line from China&#x27;s western extent straight north to the pole, and see how what is present-day Russia defends against &quot;the iron will of 1.4B people&quot; who are struggling to live where they are (China already views itself as an Arctic power). Another: USA pushing north beyond the 49th parallel.<p>3) Population control is topically political suicide in democracies; no one in power will dare broach it in seriousness at a national or multilateral level. Few such people will even give voice to relating resource levels with population levels. Instead, the mitigation strategy will find its loci in migration control and containment (keeping-their-problems-in-their-own-Stans) like we do today with Bangladesh.<p>I truly hope I&#x27;m wrong, but I have a hunch I&#x27;m not ..
评论 #32044688 未加载
评论 #32044516 未加载
edgefield将近 3 年前
The big problem is that due to feedback effects, there is no stopping at 1.5C unless we engage in highly risky mitigation techniques such as blocking sunlight with aerosols. Once permafrost begins to melt, fire season expands, and the planet&#x27;s albedo shrinks, then warming begets more warming. We are already well along this path, and the feedback effects are now accelerating.
评论 #32044404 未加载
评论 #32044253 未加载
评论 #32044638 未加载
ncmncm将近 3 年前
&quot;We need to stop pretending we can prevent the imminent collapse of civilization.&quot;<p>Maybe it will collapse when rising ocean acidification causes the base of the ocean ecosystem to collapse, eliminating a billion peoples&#x27; access to protein, leading to global war.<p>Maybe it will collapse when, in multiple regions, agriculture fails, and just being outside on certain days is fatal, so 200M people who happen to live there are obliged to go where other people already live, crossing borders and triggering rise of fascist governments, thus shortly global thermonuclear war.<p>Any other imminent inevitable global collapse scenarios as consequences of failure to contain global climate catastrophe? One suffices. So whichever is first matters. Events after will be much less predictable.<p>Certainly some people will survive the collapse, most likely even millions, maybe even a billion or more. But anyway major releases of CO2 would cease along with international trade and concrete construction.<p>Getting existing excess CO2 back out of the atmosphere would be beyond the capabilities of the remnant population, but waiting a couple of centuries would take care of that.
Brajeshwar将近 3 年前
This has been a known fact for quite a while ago. Unfortunately, big corporates are like the few stubborn kids with candies they got at the beginning of the party and now not agreeing to part with even when their friends have come to the party. Almost all solution we have so far has been to coax these kids that they will get better and more candies at the end of the party if they do spend them.<p>Almost every company taking Climate Actions aims to be on the right side of history but with much quantifiable profit. Unfortunately, the current and future costs of correcting their past mistakes run into multi-trillion dollar propositions, and the ROI is unsure.<p>Yes, there is customer and stakeholder pressure for companies to act, but that is too minuscule for now. If they spend a dollar on climate, a company will pay twice that to go and tell the world they did, to uplift their brand image.<p>So, it will be tough to sustain and stay cool unless that is what makes more money.
评论 #32045289 未加载
bambax将近 3 年前
&gt; <i>Does this mean that we should fall back to 2°C? Or just give up?</i><p>Have we not given up already?<p>I see no hint of anyone changing their behavior in the least, esp. as regards to cars, heating, air conditioning, etc.<p>Many comments blame &quot;politicians&quot;, but politicians are voted in by people. Nobody on the planet is willing to give up an inch of comfort today in the hope of avoiding disaster in the distant future.<p>In a way, this is the ultimate installment of the tragedy of the commons.
评论 #32044862 未加载
vegai_将近 3 年前
Oh man. So it goes like this:<p>1. Global Warming is not even happening<p>2. Ok, it&#x27;s happening but it&#x27;s not caused by humans<p>3. Ok, so it is caused by humans but there&#x27;s nothing we can do about it<p>4. Ok, we can do something about it but oops too late<p>I guess somewhere near step 7 we stop voting evil lizard people into power.
评论 #32044306 未加载
评论 #32044392 未加载
oliwarner将近 3 年前
The problem there is <i>we need hope</i> or we won&#x27;t do <i>anything</i>.<p>Given a hopeless outlook, 90% of people give up destructively, and the future of our species requires us to be better than that; to try. Together we will make some difference and that might make enough of a difference.
评论 #32045365 未加载
adrianN将近 3 年前
Just like we stopped pretending we can limit it to 0.5°? Or to 1°? When does this process stop? Should we just give up completely and party like it&#x27;s 1999 until fossil fuels run out?
Maursault将近 3 年前
What would if all new development was stopped, and every structure retrofit with reliable but SotA high-efficiency solar along with efficient-minded environmental upgrades and electrical audit to get the power consumption down, such that ultimately almost every structure generated most if not all of it&#x27;s own power, many contributed to the improved grid, and all transportation, shipping and planes included, was replaced with green electrical equivalent or even if compromised, obviously dismantled all coal and oil use and speculation, and somehow we got the global population under control, and we <i>stopped</i> contributing to Climate Change altogether?<p>How much hotter, globally in average, is it likely to get if we suddenly somehow stopped all the major anthropological contributors to Climate Change?<p>Because I&#x27;m starting to suspect we&#x27;ll start to see large &quot;spots&quot; temporarily appear on the surface of the Earth, perhaps drag across, and everything on the surface in that spot will have a high chance of immediate mortality. Someone chill me out.
magicalhippo将近 3 年前
When I first read about the 1.5C target in the papers I laughed out loud.<p>For me, the 1.5C target is the same as budget targets for a new big construction project. Politicians say it&#x27;ll take N million to get it to pass, but they all know it&#x27;ll end up costing at least 2-3x as much.<p>Nobody, and especially not politicians, want to do what&#x27;s required to keep it below 1.5C.
评论 #32044531 未加载
pl-94将近 3 年前
A little known fact is that we likely already crossed 1.5C.<p>Latest IPCC reports a likely cool down due to aerosols of 0.4C. But aerosols are a serious health issue (responsable of several millions premature deaths). And most of aerosols come from incomplete fossil fuels (hopefully we&#x27;ll get ride of them), whereas their lifespan is less than a few years. So their cool down effect is only temporary.<p>Also, it&#x27;s quite unknown that Europe has already at +2C. Far from Equatorial + being in a continent are factors for warming faster.
airbreather将近 3 年前
Yeah, well not saying that there are not problems, but there are problems down at the IPCC, seeing they seem to have yet to have made an accurate prediction.<p>There is a little more possible hope if you go and look at the ReThinkX people and their predictions for energy generation and use transformation, they&#x27;ve been making accurate predictions for over a decade now and offer a little more realistic view into the possible range of outcomes in the future.<p>If you want a quick start you can get a walk thru at &quot;Just Have a Think&quot; and then make your own mind up as to whether IPCC are the holder of all and every truth card, or not. Link:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;UUySXZ6y2fk" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;UUySXZ6y2fk</a><p>Thinking it&#x27;s all too late already is a problem on its own, don&#x27;t give up too easily, do something, anything - one thing is start solar cooking some days, it&#x27;s easier and better than most people think.
sebazzz将近 3 年前
The best we can do is lower our own CO2 emissions as much as possible (no flights, recycle&#x2F;upcycle) and vote wisely. Don&#x27;t get stuck in the issue of the day, but look forwards when choosing your representative.
评论 #32044231 未加载
评论 #32051489 未加载
gmuslera将近 3 年前
Then it will be that we need to stop pretending that we can limit global warming to 1.8ºC, then 2.0ºC, 2.5ºC, 4ºC, that we can avoid billions to die and that we had since the start clear that the survivors will have to live in this bunkers.<p>We still have to do everything in our hands to limit the damage, as aggressively as possible. It is an existential threat if left unchecked, or letting the biggest offenders keep with their business as usual.<p>Yes, we can take also measures to adapt or mitigate to some of the incoming (or present) consequences. But that should not take out the urgency nor resources that must be giving to switching to alternative energy sources, lower emissions in general, and massive carbon capture proyects.
cagenut将近 3 年前
who even is? the article does not quote one of their supposed straw man politicians arguing &#x27;1.5 is still alive&#x27;.<p>everybody knows 1.5 is dead. rather than treating that like the literal mass grave&#x2F;funeral it is, people are inventing some kind of naive-false-prophet science&#x2F;politician figure to &#x27;dunk on&#x27; about it so they can feel more savvy and in-the-know. the framing is one of winning a debate, not losing millions of lives. its gross.
评论 #32044256 未加载
评论 #32044418 未加载
Paul_S将近 3 年前
Make average human lifespan 150 by solving aging and we&#x27;ll solve the climate problem tomorrow. Otherwise there is no incentive for people to conserve anything.
评论 #32044943 未加载
rr808将近 3 年前
Its fascinating that Russia is the biggest country in the world and its mostly cold. Seems a like it could fit a billion climate refugees in there, I&#x27;m sure its just a matter of time.
评论 #32044275 未加载
评论 #32044779 未加载
评论 #32044259 未加载
评论 #32044762 未加载
评论 #32044705 未加载
kkfx将近 3 年前
IMVHO we need to stop pretending give numbers, especially in very short range to nature. Talking about a certain amount of temperature is like saying that today here there are 7h of sunlight so my p.v. should have produced a certain amount of energy and self-consumption should be better than the 5h of yesterday. Such numbers even if real they are meaningless because for instance in the above example yesterday there was less Sunny hours but those was continuous and fully sunny so far better for self-consumption than yesterday. Similarly at another scale it&#x27;s meaningless talking about how many millimeters of rain hit a certain area per year, if they hit all in few weeks this area is not that nice respect of a dryer one but with regular alternation of sun and rain. Long story short instead of play with meaningless math let&#x27;s try a more realistic path.<p>Today we have ONE energy production tech witch constant and not much pollutant in normal conditions, witch is nuclear fission. We can&#x27;t improve it in less than 10 years IF and only IF is the public who do that at 100%, no private business involved (otherwise 20+ year if we ever arrive to something usable). In the meantime the less pollutant is methane. p.v. can do much in certain area and to use it for sure we need to erase the idea of tall buildings and apartments pushing people toward single-family modern homes (insulation, p.v. etc) with investments on energy saving (for instance big water heaters with classic resistance BUT also a heat-pump for non-sunny days, big enough to withstand a day or two without Sun and without energy need keeping water hot enough) and LOCAL smart MICRO-grid like wishing machines, dishwashers, ovens etc who can talk a simple modbus-alike protocol to talk to an inverter and decide how to run to maximize self-consumption for instance. Such kind of evolution is possible and far quicker than new nation-wide electricity grids and mega-projects.<p>In ten years we can have remote workers and retirees in such setup, witch might be not so much, but it&#x27;s a thing. In others ten years others people have migrated, nuclear is fully on-line, renewable have replaced methane enough. Society is changed sufficiently to reduce the need of methane-made fertilizers, and agrobusiness was annihilated for the sake of humanity so we start to have less pollutant and more sustainable agriculture, a new western society is seeded. Others will adapt in another ten years. In 50 years we have done enough to survive the change without a world war and a mass genocide.
Daishiman将近 3 年前
Way ahead of you; I already stopped pretending we&#x27;ll have a habitable planet by century&#x27;s end.
评论 #32044101 未加载
评论 #32044359 未加载
评论 #32044388 未加载
评论 #32045292 未加载
评论 #32044172 未加载
评论 #32044320 未加载
rogerkirkness将近 3 年前
Danial, panic, denial, panic.
nickdothutton将近 3 年前
This is what surprises me. If we are indeed in for a prolonged period of man-made global warming, as politicians tell us (dramatic pause, earnest face, raised eyebrows) then where are the irrigation schemes, the river delta flood defences, the sea walls, the city relocations?
评论 #32044487 未加载
评论 #32044763 未加载
评论 #32045085 未加载
评论 #32044667 未加载
GiorgioG将近 3 年前
This will likely be an unpopular opinion here, but the earth has been experiencing “climate change” since its inception and all the folks panicking over it is an overreaction. Humans will adapt to the earth’s conditions. Yes we’ve impacted the climate. I’m not saying we shouldn’t continue migrating to EVs, etc. But by and large, the earth’s climate is such a complex and massive beast that it’s naïve to think that we can really make a meaningful affect what’s coming. If places become uninhabitable, then humans will migrate elsewhere as we always have. The earth will be here long after humans go extinct (probably) and it will be fine with or without us. The sky is not falling :)
评论 #32044507 未加载
评论 #32044658 未加载
评论 #32044859 未加载
评论 #32044442 未加载
评论 #32044443 未加载
评论 #32044912 未加载
评论 #32044534 未加载