It feels like I am very literally living the life depicted in sci-fi novels of my youth. Equal parts wonderful and terrifying.
It feels like I am very literally living the life depicted in sci-fi novels of my youth. Equal parts wonderful and terrifying.
But wasn't that always the case?
War was always around the corner and nuclear missile threat amplified it.
Btw. it seems the war made russia change its stance and some official "scientific" commitee has decided, that climate warming comes simply from radiation inside earth that follows a natural pattern. So no need to not burn coal then. So the hope is, that china who does believe in human made climate change will push them to still reduce CO2 somewhat. Indeed strange times.
Coal has, and continues, to cause more deaths then nuclear ever has and produces radioactive ash while at it.
All sides showed remarkable restraint in actually following up on the threats. While the possibility of nuclear war was part of the backdrop, at least the impression was made that everybody tries to be as reasonable as possible to prevent it from happening.
Compare to climate change where people actively try to sabotage stuff like renewables build out (e.g. "In 2019, the state tried to further penalize solar users by implementing a law that levied fines against solar users." [0] which was struck down eventually - but still, people considered that a good enough idea to propose, successfully vote and implement that?!?) to stick it to The Man (or something).
[0] I don't care too much about the specifics, so not naming and shaming anybody, but the source is: https://todayshomeowner.com/solar/guides/states-that-outlaw-...
Yes, but still all it takes is one crazy guy at the wrong position and time.
I am not ok with that and rather would have all the nukes directed towards the sky against asteroids.
And I am also not ok with producing tanks and artillery instead of solar panels, wind turbines and batteries. But it is, what it is. Too many short sighted people in position of power.
I think the risk of nuclear war is higher now, with more nations having more weapons, fewer treaties preventing profession, and an increasingly multipolar power dynamic in international affairs.
I too thought we were closer to nuclear war now. But really with US second strike capability, and the fact that many of the nuclear warhead numbers don’t take into account usable missiles, among other factors, makes me sleep a bit easier at night.
Thank you Mr Kissenger
Nope and it isn't the case now. End of the world cults are a common feature of human societies, pretty much all of them have/had them. My personal guess is that egos are so big that people can't imagine a world after them so it's easier to say the world is going to end.
The different tech that can make good on the apocalypse are a relatively recent addition to the equation.
We've had the ability to lay waste to the planet for just a handful of generations.
If you don't have an answer to the actual question at hand, it's okay to say so.
Will be the end of life on earth? Not at all. Will it be the total extinction of humans? Probably not. Will it be far more war, starvation, death, and human suffering than we have collectively ever witnessed? Yes.
[0]https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-pe...
The difference with climate change is the "peaceful" analog is vanishing. Humanity has always been able to choose peace. But we may soon not be able to choose to live on a healthy planet.
I’m more inclined to closely watch geopolitical events unfold, as US hegemony becomes slowly unstable and potentially untenable.
If climate change were really really as dire as some say it is, we wouldn’t be half-assing our way via renewable energies which don’t have a power grid or power store nearly capable enough to handle a “fully electric future”
We’d be spending more money than the likes of other world powers on proven nuclear energy (unlike Germany who has decommissioned theirs in favor of coal)
I think I read the nuclear waste of nuclear power stations we have today could fit in a big Walmart? That’s an insane amount of energy density. That doesn’t include the potential for nuclear diamond batteries to reuse the spent fuel rods, or other upcoming technologies to reuse the waste.
Don’t get me wrong, we should look into truly renewable energy. But needing vast amounts of rare-earth minerals for solar panels and batteries from China, or nickel and cobalt from child-labor mines in the Congo doesn’t seem to line up with the ethos of “going green”
We should “go nuclear”
Yes, this is why people are worried. It is dire and we are half-assing our responses.
I think we need less moralism and fear of complex systems, and more hard-headed, engineering-led cost-benefit analysis.
Wait until you see what millions of people displaced by rising sea levels are going to do to political and economical stability worldwide. That's not going to happen in a far distant future, that's within 30 years. Bangladesh for example is expected to lose 17% of its land by 2050, displacing millions. Miami-Dade county will be 60% under water by 2060 when current projections come to pass.
> If climate change were really really as dire as some say it is, we wouldn’t be half-assing our way via renewable energies which don’t have a power grid or power store nearly capable enough to handle a “fully electric future”
The realities of climate change and its dire consequences aren't some doomsayers internet theories. We're completely half-assing our response to it despite the scientific consensus on the brutal consequences of our doing.
> We should “go nuclear”
That ship has sailed at least 20 years ago. Starting now with average construction times of 10 years plus they would come too late to make a difference.
Renewables are cheaper to build and faster to construct so that's were the world is heading.
https://www.iea.org/news/renewable-power-on-course-to-shatte...
Yes it is outside of our sphere of influence. It’s bad parenting to make kids worry about things outside of their control.
And before you criticize me, know that I’m a cloth diapering, organic food growing back-to-land hippy. I’m happy to compare our carbon footprints.
As a related experience, I picked up my son from a birthday party and the birthday consisted of a rented massive trailer with big screen TVs and 7-8 different video game consoles for couch coop gaming. All powered by a generator. Very cool and very frightening all at the same time.
Our planet needs strong leadership that dictates what can and cannot be done. Instead we have leaders making up solutions that are not solutions, but are presented as such.
I thought the major issue was the speed of change, but we really don't know what life is thing to do in response.
According to this article, during the Cambrian, the earth was 10C hotter than it is today.
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2022/09/20/you-asked-dinos...
We're going to need to adapt, and things will be harder, but I believe it's totally doable.
In Vanuatu, sea level rise is a very real concept with a number of communities already being inundated during high tides
(2016) ref: https://www.spatialsource.com.au/sea-level-rise-mapping-reac...
In that light I’d like to underline that in the “this is fine” meme, things are actually on fire. It’s an apt comparison.
This implies that Vanuatu's absolute elevation is decreasing. I can find no reference for this. If this decrease is true, please supply your sources.
The headline doesn't either, because Earth has been very hot in the past.
https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2022/09/20/you-asked-dinos...
I guess I was thinking after the current ecosystems are wiped out, it will open up the niche for something else to take hold and evolve in their place. Isn't that what the geological record shows during mass extinctions?
The population could have been very happy and rich with around 1 billion people — less garbage, less pollution, less extinction of species, less monocultures and farms, more biodiversity, sustainable resources, and not as much pressure on ecosystems.
But we live on an exological credit card.
They already do, in tons of countries
It might take care of itself, if not for AI and nukes humanity could be fine. But they just can’t resist, humanity seems to be acting like a rapacious child because of competition across countries.
As for your question… look ul the Doomsday Argument. 7% of all people who ever existed are alive today. If the population constantly increases then given the fact that you are alive means you’re more than likely living in the last days before a major population crash. The only question is what will be behind it — birth control or some ecosystem collapse?