←back to thread

399 points gmays | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.419s | source
Show context
root_axis ◴[] No.42166375[source]
Doesn't seem like there is any foreseeable future where climate change can be addressed. It's not just the leadership of the u.s, but the citizens themselves reject climate change as a real issue. Hopefully I'm just being pessemsitic.
replies(3): >>42166433 #>>42166450 #>>42166664 #
baq ◴[] No.42166433[source]
Oh a lot of those citizens care - it’s that they travel to Japan for vacation anyway.
replies(3): >>42166749 #>>42166908 #>>42167152 #
autoexec ◴[] No.42166908[source]
Let's not pretend that the family vacation is the real driver to climate change. Most Americans aren't jet-setting on a regular basis.
replies(1): >>42167545 #
moffkalast ◴[] No.42167545[source]
Air travel is only 11% of all transport emissions, so it's not all that significant, especially given that it's often the only real option for covering vast distances.

But Americans do drive everywhere, and that's 48% of all transport emissions (just cars, not even counting trucks, with that it's more like 73% for all road transport). So yeah. Nobody gives a fuck.

replies(2): >>42168211 #>>42169107 #
reducesuffering ◴[] No.42168211[source]
X is only Y% of emissions is the NIMBY of climate change. You can slice every single emissions source as "only Y% of emissions, you should worry about the others first", and then nothing is done on any of them. No, you tackle everything above 0.5%. Otherwise, the SUV's say blame the private jets, the private jets say blame the SUV's, the public transport blames the EV's, America blames China, China blames America's past, the consumers blame the producers and the producers blame the consumers, etc.
replies(2): >>42168274 #>>42168335 #
1. moffkalast ◴[] No.42168274[source]
Well sure, but not all fields have zero emissions solutions available. Solutions need to be found, but they might not be there in time.

General power production is currently 25% of total, we can fix that with hydro, wind, solar, nuclear. Plans are clear, they need to be put into action.

Agriculture is another 25% which will be a candidate for reduction once there's something more energy dense than diesel available to run every tractor and combine harvester in the world (currently looking like never). EV tractors are in the golf cart stage of usefulness. Not something we can realistically reduce by much if you want to continue eating food.

Home emissions are only 6-8%, but we can easily drive that to zero with induction cookers and ban of fuel oil heating, subsidizing heat pumps and district heating.

Of the 14% that is transport, cars can go EV and vans/trucks for city last mile delivery. Semi trucks should be replaced as much as possible by electric trains (good luck building that much rail though). On the other hand planes can't even ditch leaded fuel for piston engines yet, they're so far behind. Electric planes are a 1 hour flight time joke, hydrogen use is nonexistent. Sea shipping can go battery electric as well although it would be incredibly expensive.

How much we can cut down in the 20% that's emitted by industry is a good question that I have little insight into. I presume some chemical processes inherently release CO2, but there is a lot that can likely be done.