(www.lancaster.ac.uk)

399 points gmays | 2 comments | 17 Nov 24 18:49 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | 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.

Technology is not going to get us out of this mess.

pfisch ◴[17 Nov 24 20:20 UTC] No.42166853[source]▶

Seems like we could deflect 1% of sunlight with existing technology. I don't get why we aren't doing this.

We are already terraforming the globe, so we might as well do it intentionally.

replies(1): >>42167000 #

1. Vegenoid ◴[17 Nov 24 20:37 UTC] No.42167000[source]▶

The perceived risk of dramatic unexpected effects is too great for people to consider this before things start getting really bad.

We’ll see how people feel in 50 years.

replies(1): >>42168522 #

2. pfisch ◴[18 Nov 24 00:11 UTC] No.42168522[source]▶

I just don't see how it is any riskier than what we are doing right now, flooding the atmosphere with CO2 and watching the ocean acidify.

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