←back to thread

Humans have caused 1.5 °C of long-term global warming according to new estimates

(www.lancaster.ac.uk)
399 points gmays | 4 comments | 17 Nov 24 18:49 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
pstrateman ◴[17 Nov 24 19:52 UTC] No.42166593[source]▶
The simple reality is that humanity is unable to reduce greenhouse gas emissions without an alternative that is superior.

For every ton of CO2 that the west has reduced in the past decade China has produced three tons of CO2.[1]

We need another breakthrough on the scale of the Haber process.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co2?country=OWID_WRL~Hi...

replies(7): >>42166633 #>>42166639 #>>42166762 #>>42166890 #>>42166901 #>>42166937 #>>42167095 #
benchmarkist ◴[17 Nov 24 19:58 UTC] No.42166639[source]▶
Technology is not going to get us out of this mess.
replies(7): >>42166658 #>>42166713 #>>42166727 #>>42166746 #>>42166759 #>>42166853 #>>42166950 #
1. pstrateman ◴[17 Nov 24 20:07 UTC] No.42166727[source]▶
If you truly believe that then the options for what happens are universally bad.
replies(1): >>42166742 #
2. benchmarkist ◴[17 Nov 24 20:08 UTC] No.42166742[source]▶
The history of life is a history of extinctions and I don't think humanity is an exception to that rule.
replies(1): >>42167303 #
3. Ekaros ◴[17 Nov 24 21:11 UTC] No.42167303[source]▶
I honestly think that we are. The reduction might be extreme say 90 to 99%. But that still leaves 80 to 800 million humans living some sort of existence. Might not be same as now, but I am almost certain humans won't go extinct.
replies(1): >>42167584 #
4. benchmarkist ◴[17 Nov 24 21:44 UTC] No.42167584{3}[source]▶
I guess that's why everyone is in a rush to develop AI, artificial wombs, genetic engineering, and robots but given the scale of the ecological damage I'm not sure what exactly the survivors are going to do with the entire mess.