432
We Just Lived Through Two of the Hottest Days Ever. Does Anyone Care? (www.rollingstone.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M] to c/climate@slrpnk.net
66 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 44 points 2 years ago (11 children)

It doesn't take aliens or a true AGI; it takes stopping fossil fuel use, ending deforestation, and phasing out a few trace chemicals. Do that, and we end the rising temperatures

Making that happen is a matter of seizing power from those who profit from the current system of extraction and burning.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 32 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Oh I totally agree with you, but

    a matter of seizing power from those who profit from the current system of extraction and burning.

    This is the problem. To say this wouldn't be easy is a huge, gargantuan understatement.

    The power and control is so far reaching and deep into the foundation of our society, I can't help being cynical. By using politics and propaganda techniques huge portions of the population have been convinced that global warming either isn't real, isn't important, or is actually a good thing. And this is only one hurdle to overcome along with many others.

    The question is how do we seize power back.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    I'm a bit dubious that revolutions can be effective nowadays against a well organised oppressive state with present tools (propaganda, police, surveillance, corruption). All revolutions have failed over the last few decades (Iran, Venezuela, Syria, Tunisia then Arab Spring, etc.).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    And the odds of any of that actually happening? How exactly are you going to regulate the growth of industries internationally in a way that doesn't just end up offshoring the pollution to poor countries like it already has been for centuries?

    Dudes right, we need a dues ex machina to save us. We won't make meaningful changes until it's profitable to do so. So expect to see a lot of companies transition into cooling and environmental control. Because they won't address the core problem, just sell you bandaids for the symptoms. The next advancement won't be "less emissions", it'll be "this new coolant cools 35% better".

    Look at heat pumps. Its literally just an AC unit that can swap the hot and cold side with a valve. It's nothing new. But it's the new "miracle cure" to all your heating and cooling needs. Just run your electricity that most likely comes from a coal power plant and smugly think about how you personally aren't using gas to do it!

    We won't fix it ourselves without major intervention.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Realistically, you couple domestic regulation with a carbon tariff, assessing incoming goods a fee based on differential pollution in their country of origin.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Ok. You did that. China is still selling to other countries and polluting all over the place.

    Now what?

    Somalia is still burning our recycling. What about that?

    For every hole you plug, there are 10 more. But sure, we can call agree on this one thing even though the entire history of humanity has basically been "I disagree, let's fight a war over it".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    Well yeah but...

    Even if tomorrow we start really working on getting the CO2 levels down (protip: we won't), humanity will be spending half their world energy budget for the next 50-100 years at least to get CO2 levels back to what they should be (pre industrialized levels). Even if we go for something more semi reasonable, say pre 1980 levels, we'll still be spending half our entire world energy budget on this for like a decade. This ain't an easy problem

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    No not easy. It's way cheaper to avoid making it worse than it is to try and put things back the way they were.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    The next generations after us are facing shit storms. This all boils down to thermodynamics. We took energy at the cost of generating CO2. Taking that CO2 back, aggregating, filtering, converting, storing... Add in losses (be generous and take 50% conversion rates), we will need multiple times all the energy we took over the last two centuries to take all that CO2 out.

    When I said decades of spending half our energy budget, I was very VERY generous. Reality is that we might have to be doing that for centuries, maybe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent