OT : Climate Change fight

nelsonroyale

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,420
Not bad, but we still have a long way to go. I am involved in the divestment campaign and while the SNP are definitely more progressive than the shambles in Westminster, they are still effectively lowballing:
  • Still massive promoters of the oil reserves in North Sea without any timeline are commitment for keeping reserves in the ground. Sturgeon casts herself as a climate champion while constantly sweet talking the oil industry.
  • Many commitments aren't that ambitious, i.e., electric cars by 2038 or some such, and nowhere near 1.5c
  • Talk up emissions targets, but don't capture data on consumption emissions, just territorial emissions. I know the former is hard to capture, but it is the figure that matters most.
  • Haven't even committed to divesting any of their pension funds, let alone their other investment sources.
So far there really hasn't been much done to promote smarter / decreases in consumption habits. This is an area where the most rapid gains can probably be made.
 

captive

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,921
Houston
Does anyone else think that the argument against electric cars in regards to how the electricity is generated is disingenuous? I believe the theoretical maximum efficiency of a combustion engine is around 14%; the rest of the energy in the gasoline is exhausted as waste heat. A power plant much more efficiently converts fossil fuels into electricity than an ICE converts them into motion. Even if the electricity used to charge an EV comes from coal or gas it takes that energy and uses 80-90% of it for motion.
of course it is there was an article recently that Musk liked or tweeted, that was base don a study disproving this exact premise. Electric cars are greener than ICE cars even when powered with coal. but of course i can't find it now.
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
There are so many factors, I don't think one study can confirm everything.

As batteries recycling and production gets better, electric cars will win easily.
 

Tamerlane

Member
Oct 27, 2017
113
Surely the losses in efficiency in terms of component aging and transmission losses through the grid don't come close to 86%. Also that 14% figure is the theoretical maximum most combustion engines don't come close to that figure. Most of the energy in gasoline is just exhausted as waste heat.
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738


https://www.euronews.com/2019/02/01/youth-climate-change-protests-spread-through-belgium-in-fourth-week?fbclid=IwAR2rlvyP6U6ja4l8ANTrzZPZ-2eJyQwVyIOk0ng_jDkXDtR3wwLSxnL4RTA

The streets of Brussels were buzzing on Thursday as thousands of Belgian teens marched for the fourth week in a row, demanding more extreme measures be taken to combat climate change.

This week the young protesters were joined by youths demonstrating in Liège and Leuven with a combined total of more than 30,000 participating in the movement.
Toronto company opens door to green investing
Once the strict domain of accredited investors, green energy investments are now open to millions of Canadians who can add eco products to their portfolio while making a difference in the world.

One example that investors have been eyeing is CoPower Green Bonds. Since launching just three years ago with a starting goal of raising $300,000, the Montreal-based company has now raised over $30 million for clean energy projects from investors across the country. More than $18 million of that has been through Green Bonds and the rest through funds available to accredited investors.
https://www.thestar.com/sponsored_sections/2019/01/17/toronto-company-opens-door-to-green-investing-.html?utm_campaign=smm-copower&utm_medium=paid-social&utm_source=facebook&utm_content=copower-fb1&fbclid=IwAR1eid1NVgnKlqVjNogXFTF7IbMpHM_K5qmoHJ5JaBt8JthzDGKvYvbkAUE
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738

Moving artificial leaves out of the lab and into the air

According to their calculations, 360 leaves, each 1.7 meters long and 0.2 meters wide, would produce close to a half-ton of carbon monoxide per day that could be used as the basis for synthetic fuels. Three hundred and sixty of these artificial leaves covering a 500-meter square area would be able to reduce carbon dioxide levels by 10 percent in the surrounding air within 100 meters of the array in one day.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/02/190212160020.htm
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
This is amazing. She is amazing. One person can truly change the world!
Imagine being 16 years old and make the the President of the European Commission take a pledge.

EU's Juncker proposes billions of spending on climate change after a 16-year-old's speech
  • Every fourth euro spent within the EU budget will go towards climate mitigation actions between 2021 and 2027, Jean-Claude Juncker says.
  • His comments came after 16-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg spoke at the plenary session of the European Economic and Social Committee.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/22/juncker-proposes-climate-change-spending-after-greta-thunberg-speech.html
 

Mr.F

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,713
bookmarked. with the seemingly weekly reports/reminders of how colossally fucked everything is it's nice to have a few sources of positive news around combating climate change to stave off the utter hopelessness.
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
Imagin being a depressive folk on Era...

Or being a teenager with a plan to plant a trillion trees.

Today, Finkbeiner is 19—and Plant-for-the-Planet, the environmental group he founded, together with the UN’s Billion Tree campaign, has planted more than 14 billion trees in more than 130 nations. The group has also pushed the planting goal upward to one trillion trees—150 for every person on the Earth.

The organization also prompted the first scientific, full-scale global tree count, which is now aiding NASA in an ongoing study of forests’ abilities to store carbon dioxide and their potential to better protect the Earth. In many ways, Finkbeiner has done more than any other activist to recruit youth to the climate change movement. Plant-for-the-Planet now has an army of 55,000 “climate justice ambassadors,” who have trained in one-day workshops to become climate activists in their home communities. Most of them are between the ages nine and 12.

“Felix is a combination of inspirational and articulate,” says Thomas Crowther, an ecologist who conducted the tree count while working at Yale University in Connecticut. “A lot of people are good at one of those things. Felix is really good at both.”
https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/environment-and-conservation/2017/11/teenager-track-plant-trillion-trees


BUT BUT nobody's doing anything!
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/12/opinions/climate-change-opinion-heal/index.html

The progress we have made to replace coal and gas as our primary energy sources has already begun to take control of some of the greatest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions. What is even more remarkable is we are doing it at little to no increase to the cost of power, according to my calculations.

Take the United States as an example. Wind and solar power are now on average the least expensive ways of generating electricity. In some locations, wind and solar energy prices are as little as one-third the cost of coal. Even without including the contribution of coal to global warming, it is simply no longer a cost-effective energy source. Wind and solar are now economically sounder investments.
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
EARTH DAY 2019
How you can get involved and make a difference

Spring is our favorite time of year at One Tree Planted! As the sun comes out for longer and the ground starts to thaw, spring is the best time for planting trees. It's also the season for Earth Day: Monday 22 April!

What is Earth Day? It's an annual celebration of our beautiful planet, with a mission to promote a greener future. This year's focus is to End Plastic Pollution. Did you know plastic bags have a lifespan of 1,000 years? That’s five times the lifespan of the average maple tree!

Looking to do your part for the environment this Earth Day? We've got lots of ideas. Read on...
https://onetreeplanted.org/pages/earth-day
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
Some great news today!!!

Norway's $1tn wealth fund to divest from oil and gas exploration

The world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, which manages $1tn (£770bn) of Norway’s assets, is to dump investments in firms that explore for oil and gas, but will still hold stakes in firms such as BP and Shell that have renewable energy divisions.

The Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG), whose assets exceed those of rival sovereign wealth funds such as China’s, said it would phase out oil exploration from its “investment universe”.

It will retain stakes in fossil fuel companies as long as they have some involvement in renewable energy. Its stakes in large firms with renewable units include 2.4% of Shell and 2.3% of BP, because it believes they will play a major role in developing green energy.

It will sell stakes in 134 companies, including UK-listed firms Tullow Oil, Premier Oil, Soco International, Ophir Energy and Nostrum Oil & Gas, all of which experienced a fall in share price after the announcement, knocking £130m off their combined stock market value.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/08/norways-1tn-wealth-fund-to-divest-from-oil-and-gas-exploration?fbclid=IwAR0r9E19rpBFkWDm_o7cktlGFlhjziJey5iVjQlnrUHI5SnIVBack1R-Qeg


Australia to plant 1 billion trees to help meet climate targets

SYDNEY (BLOOMBERG) - Australia aims to plant a billion trees by 2050 as part of a new forestry plan the government says will help the country meet its Paris Agreement climate targets.

A sod-turning spree on that scale would contribute to the removal of 18 million tonnes of greenhouse gas per year by 2030 in a country currently producing in excess of 500 million tonnes of CO2-equivalent per year.
https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/australianz/australia-to-plant-1-billion-trees-to-help-meet-climate-targets
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
Greta Thundberg interview in The Guardian



Greta Thunberg, schoolgirl climate change warrior: ‘Some people can let things go. I can’t’
One day last summer, aged 15, she skipped school, sat down outside the Swedish parliament – and inadvertently kicked off a global movement
https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/11/greta-thunberg-schoolgirl-climate-change-warrior-some-people-can-let-things-go-i-cant?__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR1IMPn8w8gmlxH-rTg_phw5ulrNDCMtNMnl1dEnu7HpGl-o34dZO909Lz8
 

Shodan14

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,946
Sorry, but at least that OP is for USA Climate Change OT :(

Which toilet paper should us poor Europeans use?
 
Last edited:

More_Badass

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,938
What are good arguments or articles to use to counter the “plants need carbon dioxide and it’s a waste product from us, so it can’t be bad for the environment” logic?
 

Haselbacher

Member
Oct 27, 2017
156
I mean, the argument is kind of true.
But, a human produces 15 g CO2 per km. A car produces ca 175 g per km.

If it would be just us humans to produce CO2 that would be true.
But we invented very energy inefficient machines that produce multiples of the amount humans and animals produce.

The dose makes the poison.
 

Alcotholic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,889
What are good arguments or articles to use to counter the “plants need carbon dioxide and it’s a waste product from us, so it can’t be bad for the environment” logic?
Well, excessive carbon emission leads to warmer climates which can effectively kill off plants not suited for certain climates. That’s how I see it.
And as the poster above said, it’s in excess of what plants need/use. So where does the excess go? Into our atmosphere.
 

Tawpgun

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,816
Oof is Kirkland Signature really that bad? That's kinda surprising considering the company is pretty sustainable in other areas
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
The most effective way to tackle climate change? Plant 1 trillion trees

But while there may be space for a trillion new trees, is it actually practical to plant that number?
One organization that thinks so is youth-led Plant for the Planet (PFTP), which is running the "Trillion Tree" campaign to do just that.
Set up as the "Billion Tree" campaign by the UN in 2006, it was later handed over to PFTP, which has upped its planting ambitions in response to Crowther's work.

Crowther is a scientific adviser to Plant for the Planet, providing them with information on the best places to restore trees. He says all the locations identified by his team are on degraded land, rather than agricultural or urban areas.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/08/world/gold-mining-deforestation-peru-record-levels-trnd/index.html
"These are places where farms have been abandoned, or where there's been deforestation and it's been left," he explains.

To successfully fight climate change, it's vital that the right land is restored. For example, in parts of northern Europe, planting more trees could reduce the heat and light reflected from snowy ground, and actually increase global warming.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/17/world/trillion-trees-climate-change-intl-scn/index.html?fbclid=IwAR10a6sOqKvY6nIODog-U_unhIp64LBiMLc8ZkXlIRGblSFJb9mCUQnnZpw
 

bangai-o

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,181
Water consumption and additional pesticide and fertilizer use. Per capita, as it were, local growers use more water and chemicals on their crops than agri-business does.

Strictly speaking from a climate change point of view, growing local is not a good option.
I am going to have to disagree with this unless you have some evidence. Water and soil useage or wastage, really depends on the farming methods. For example, many large farms (owned by big agri) still use flood irrigation.



which is a massive waste of water. Compared to drip irrigation.



If a small neigborhood decided to have a community farm, do you think they are going to use flood irrigation? Of course not. They are just going to use the hose to water when needed.
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/23/greta-thunberg-full-speech-to-mps-you-did-not-act-in-time?fbclid=IwAR0NT4AsJNghT6Jk-n7-__bixGVvIGSvYMbfnmKKLSS_AGm-tOV9Zn3w2tQ

My name is Greta Thunberg. I am 16 years old. I come from Sweden. And I speak on behalf of future generations.

I know many of you don’t want to listen to us – you say we are just children. But we’re only repeating the message of the united climate science.

Many of you appear concerned that we are wasting valuable lesson time, but I assure you we will go back to school the moment you start listening to science and give us a future. Is that really too much to ask?

In the year 2030 I will be 26 years old. My little sister Beata will be 23. Just like many of your own children or grandchildren. That is a great age, we have been told. When you have all of your life ahead of you. But I am not so sure it will be that great for us.

I was fortunate to be born in a time and place where everyone told us to dream big; I could become whatever I wanted to. I could live wherever I wanted to. People like me had everything we needed and more. Things our grandparents could not even dream of. We had everything we could ever wish for and yet now we may have nothing.

Now we probably don’t even have a future any more.

Because that future was sold so that a small number of people could make unimaginable amounts of money. It was stolen from us every time you said that the sky was the limit, and that you only live once.

Advertisement

You lied to us. You gave us false hope. You told us that the future was something to look forward to. And the saddest thing is that most children are not even aware of the fate that awaits us. We will not understand it until it’s too late. And yet we are the lucky ones. Those who will be affected the hardest are already suffering the consequences. But their voices are not heard.

Is my microphone on? Can you hear me?

Around the year 2030, 10 years 252 days and 10 hours away from now, we will be in a position where we set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control, that will most likely lead to the end of our civilisation as we know it. That is unless in that time, permanent and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society have taken place, including a reduction of CO2 emissions by at least 50%.

And please note that these calculations are depending on inventions that have not yet been invented at scale, inventions that are supposed to clear the atmosphere of astronomical amounts of carbon dioxide.

Furthermore, these calculations do not include unforeseen tipping points and feedback loops like the extremely powerful methane gas escaping from rapidly thawing arctic permafrost.

Nor do these scientific calculations include already locked-in warming hidden by toxic air pollution. Nor the aspect of equity – or climate justice – clearly stated throughout the Paris agreement, which is absolutely necessary to make it work on a global scale.

We must also bear in mind that these are just calculations. Estimations. That means that these “points of no return” may occur a bit sooner or later than 2030. No one can know for sure. We can, however, be certain that they will occur approximately in these timeframes, because these calculations are not opinions or wild guesses.

These projections are backed up by scientific facts, concluded by all nations through the IPCC. Nearly every single major national scientific body around the world unreservedly supports the work and findings of the IPCC.

Did you hear what I just said? Is my English OK? Is the microphone on? Because I’m beginning to wonder.

During the last six months I have travelled around Europe for hundreds of hours in trains, electric cars and buses, repeating these life-changing words over and over again. But no one seems to be talking about it, and nothing has changed. In fact, the emissions are still rising.

When I have been travelling around to speak in different countries, I am always offered help to write about the specific climate policies in specific countries. But that is not really necessary. Because the basic problem is the same everywhere. And the basic problem is that basically nothing is being done to halt – or even slow – climate and ecological breakdown, despite all the beautiful words and promises.

The UK is, however, very special. Not only for its mind-blowing historical carbon debt, but also for its current, very creative, carbon accounting.

Since 1990 the UK has achieved a 37% reduction of its territorial CO2 emissions, according to the Global Carbon Project. And that does sound very impressive. But these numbers do not include emissions from aviation, shipping and those associated with imports and exports. If these numbers are included the reduction is around 10% since 1990 – or an an average of 0.4% a year, according to Tyndall Manchester.

And the main reason for this reduction is not a consequence of climate policies, but rather a 2001 EU directive on air quality that essentially forced the UK to close down its very old and extremely dirty coal power plants and replace them with less dirty gas power stations. And switching from one disastrous energy source to a slightly less disastrous one will of course result in a lowering of emissions.

But perhaps the most dangerous misconception about the climate crisis is that we have to “lower” our emissions. Because that is far from enough. Our emissions have to stop if we are to stay below 1.5-2C of warming. The “lowering of emissions” is of course necessary but it is only the beginning of a fast process that must lead to a stop within a couple of decades, or less. And by “stop” I mean net zero – and then quickly on to negative figures. That rules out most of today’s politics.

The fact that we are speaking of “lowering” instead of “stopping” emissions is perhaps the greatest force behind the continuing business as usual. The UK’s active current support of new exploitation of fossil fuels – for example, the UK shale gas fracking industry, the expansion of its North Sea oil and gas fields, the expansion of airports as well as the planning permission for a brand new coal mine – is beyond absurd.

This ongoing irresponsible behaviour will no doubt be remembered in history as one of the greatest failures of humankind.

People always tell me and the other millions of school strikers that we should be proud of ourselves for what we have accomplished. But the only thing that we need to look at is the emission curve. And I’m sorry, but it’s still rising. That curve is the only thing we should look at.

Every time we make a decision we should ask ourselves; how will this decision affect that curve? We should no longer measure our wealth and success in the graph that shows economic growth, but in the curve that shows the emissions of greenhouse gases. We should no longer only ask: “Have we got enough money to go through with this?” but also: “Have we got enough of the carbon budget to spare to go through with this?” That should and must become the centre of our new currency.

Many people say that we don’t have any solutions to the climate crisis. And they are right. Because how could we? How do you “solve” the greatest crisis that humanity has ever faced? How do you “solve” a war? How do you “solve” going to the moon for the first time? How do you “solve” inventing new inventions?

The climate crisis is both the easiest and the hardest issue we have ever faced. The easiest because we know what we must do. We must stop the emissions of greenhouse gases. The hardest because our current economics are still totally dependent on burning fossil fuels, and thereby destroying ecosystems in order to create everlasting economic growth.

“So, exactly how do we solve that?” you ask us – the schoolchildren striking for the climate.

And we say: “No one knows for sure. But we have to stop burning fossil fuels and restore nature and many other things that we may not have quite figured out yet.”

Then you say: “That’s not an answer!”

So we say: “We have to start treating the crisis like a crisis – and act even if we don’t have all the solutions.”

“That’s still not an answer,” you say.

Then we start talking about circular economy and rewilding nature and the need for a just transition. Then you don’t understand what we are talking about.

We say that all those solutions needed are not known to anyone and therefore we must unite behind the science and find them together along the way. But you do not listen to that. Because those answers are for solving a crisis that most of you don’t even fully understand. Or don’t want to understand.

You don’t listen to the science because you are only interested in solutions that will enable you to carry on like before. Like now. And those answers don’t exist any more. Because you did not act in time.

Avoiding climate breakdown will require cathedral thinking. We must lay the foundation while we may not know exactly how to build the ceiling.

Sometimes we just simply have to find a way. The moment we decide to fulfil something, we can do anything. And I’m sure that the moment we start behaving as if we were in an emergency, we can avoid climate and ecological catastrophe. Humans are very adaptable: we can still fix this. But the opportunity to do so will not last for long. We must start today. We have no more excuses.

We children are not sacrificing our education and our childhood for you to tell us what you consider is politically possible in the society that you have created. We have not taken to the streets for you to take selfies with us, and tell us that you really admire what we do.

We children are doing this to wake the adults up. We children are doing this for you to put your differences aside and start acting as you would in a crisis. We children are doing this because we want our hopes and dreams back.

I hope my microphone was on. I hope you could all hear me.
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkobayashisolomon/2019/04/26/historic-inflection-point-mankinds-battle-against-climate-change/?fbclid=IwAR1H0JmXWfAPd2-gcU4GDOiX8ivHLSUf2AANCS6ihl-Xalf971cWn5wiMHM#2de9b9077829

In a major announcement that earned coverage from such august outlets as the BBC and the New York Times, Carbon Engineering – a firm I highlighted in the article Capitalism vs Climate Change: The Case of Carbon Engineering – revealed it had received a game-changing $68 million investment in its innovative direct air capture technology.

Direct air capture – for readers new to the topic – is a process of extracting carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere. Carbon Engineering’s technology allows the captured CO2 to be sequestered underground, used in industrial processes, or even processed into transportation fuel.
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has declared a "climate emergency" in her speech to the SNP conference.

Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has declared a "climate emergency" in her speech to the SNP conference.

The SNP leader told delegates in Edinburgh she was inspired after meeting young climate campaigners who had gone on strike from school.

Ms Sturgeon said "they are right", and pledged to "live up to our responsibility" to halt climate change.

She also announced what she described as the SNP's "biggest campaign on the economics of independence".

Labour is expected to press the UK government to declare a national climate emergency on Wednesday.

The party will call for a dramatic cut in the UK's carbon emissions, with leader Jeremy Corbyn also calling for a UK-wide ban on fracking.

Fracking has already been halted in Scotland by Ms Sturgeon's devolved government.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-48077802?fbclid=IwAR23ZO2v6vydmSJ03gJzBOeYYjyD_kIF_swBDTwEUG0T2XRWkef2lcBQKeE
 
OP
OP
Pomerlaw

Pomerlaw

Member
Feb 25, 2018
2,738
Children Change Their Parents’ Minds about Climate Change

Postulating that pupils might be ideal influencers, the researchers decided to test how 10-to-14–year-olds’ exposure to climate change coursework might affect, not only the youngsters’ views, but those of their parents. The proposed pass-through effect turned out to be true: teaching a child about the warming climate often raised concerns among parents about the issue. Fathers and conservative parents showed the biggest change in attitudes, and daughters were more effective than sons in shifting their parents’ views.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/children-change-their-parents-minds-about-climate-change/?fbclid=IwAR07LfoWPIGg11PcRNMvaVXMNp8FAurRZbwgHZnVfd_tcMdl3g_oDX_kHZE
 

Troast

Member
Oct 31, 2017
407
Keep up the fight, but we need to go harder. March 2019 was the 2nd hottest March since records began in 1880 and now April 2019 was the 2nd hottest April ever. CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing at a greater rate (so far) this year than any other in recorded history.
 

Clefargle

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,236
Limburg
Glad there’s an OT. This needs to be more urgent. I’m trying to recycle since 2015 and having pretty good results here in the Netherlands. Riding a bike helps and taking public transit(e-busses are nice). But not every country has the infrastructure yet. This should be a top priority. Back home in the US, infrastructure is crumbling, and all the logistics is done by private shipping corps.
 

Akinsa

Member
Oct 28, 2017
748
of course it is there was an article recently that Musk liked or tweeted, that was base don a study disproving this exact premise. Electric cars are greener than ICE cars even when powered with coal. but of course i can't find it now.
People forget that every ICE car is essentially a miniature fossil fuel power station. It doesn’t take much to realise that centralising the power generation to a single station is a lot more efficient then everyone having their own, and how it’s a lot easier to make that energy cleaner in the future. Plus power stations don’t generally spew their exhaust within populated areas like cars do.
 

Dinjooh

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
1,457
Denmark
Massive props to OP for continuing to post updates to a criminally underutilized thread. (Which I also never saw before today)
 

Conciliator

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,133
Massive props to OP for continuing to post updates to a criminally underutilized thread. (Which I also never saw before today)
Yeah I wanna boost this too, you're doing the right thing OP. I think any time anyone sees any news about the direction this is going, which is frequently at this point, we should copy/paste and bump this thread
 

Alcotholic

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,889
Can we get the admins to sticky this thread for more exposure?
Edit: I just submitted it to Community Spotlight.
 

Airegin

Member
Dec 10, 2017
2,020
The way I see it, we'll continue to do nothing until we hit 2 degrees, then we'll resort to stratospheric aerosol injection to stay below 2 degrees for another 30 years which will be the only way to prevent billions of deaths. That's also just enough time to plant a trillion trees, let the rainforests grow back and switch to nuclear energy but I'm less hopeful about that.
 

Josh378

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,320
I see we are attempting to try to reverse this...but why do we always have to react as a whole(every person on the earth)only when shit finally hits the fan for every. I hate that the humans are a reactionary race...