!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
End all fossil fuel use asap and make trade blocks that prefer countries that do the same. Tarrifs for those that use dirty fuels beyond the Eurobloc's schedule.
Remember, even if we stopped today, there is a 20 year lag time so it's getting way, way worse.
https://www.iea.org/energy-system/fossil-fuels#tracking
We are still growing fossil fuel use. The repercussions are enormous, and effectively, permanent.
But that would hurt fossil fuel companies, so we can't do that. (/jk)
At this point we need to spend all of our effort in advancing ways we can pull carbon out of the atmosphere and ocean, we are fucked unless we find an efficient way to do so.
Yes, but I don't believe there is any process could ever be efficient enough.
Deep ocean algae farms might do it. Oil companies have brought up and side lined research on it for decades however.
nothing, nothing we do now will stop the warming. if we end all fossil fuel burning, concrete production, and livestock production tomorrow, the atmosphere will continue to warm for hundreds of years before peaking. We are cooked. Grab your popcorn.
This. What part of "well past the tipping point" do people not understand? The time to take drastic action was 20 years ago. It's "adapt or die" time. The good news is, the elderly are more vulnerable so that should help with the population decline issue.
Sorry. But this comment made me think of this:
Anyway? We’re fucked and the game now is to mitigate and adapt.
And yet we must stop climate change instead of making it even worse.
nothing, nothing we do now will stop the warming.
What if (theoretically speaking, because I don't think we're close yet) we rolled out carbon-capture technology and implementation on a massive scale? How much useful impact would that have on mitigating CC versus how much of that is still out of our hands?
Carbon capture technology was always some kind of excuse that execs had to pollute today because we could theoretically fix it in the future.
Despite some technology that works to remove carbon from the atmosphere, it's just not viable. We output so much CO2 to the atmosphere that we just have no capacity to even build enough carbon capture facilities to reach net zero, and that's without taking their energy consumption into account. Even if we stopped producing CO2 tomorrow, and suddenly enough carbon capture facilities to capture carbon at the same rate we were releasing it appeared, it would still take decades to make a meaningful change.
And carbon isn't our only problem. Methane is a way worse greenhouse gas, and we keep releasing it to the atmosphere because it's cheaper than trying to control it.
This is not to discourage from building such carbon capture technology. If it's powered by renewables and built without a significant carbon/other contaminants footprint, by all means, build it. But it won't save us from what's to come.
👆
Also, it would be helpful not to worsen it with some hype, currently AI or to let go of old fossil technology. But there we go.
That's the thing about climate change.
One place can do everything right..if the other countries in the world doesn't do the same everyone is fucked regardless.
NO! This is not just false, it's dangerously false.
If a country takes measures to emit 500M less tons of CO2 per year, the result is... 500M less tons of CO2 in the air per year than otherwise. That helps!
There isn't a single fucked/not fucked threshold. There are a lot of nuances of fucked and each one we dodge puts us in an incrementally less awful place. Who knows how many more lives saved for each Mton CO2 not produced. Who knows how many species get to live, how many fewer days of heatwave per year, how many more glaciers survive.
I STG, "we're already fucked anyway" is oil shill talk. Fuck that noise, let's make oil obsolete, let's avoid entire shades of fucked, we've already made insane progress with renewables and electric cars, let's just keep going! Let's pressure our individual politicians because you know the fuckers love it when you give up! You on board?
If a country takes measures to emit 500M less tons of CO2 per year, the result is… 500M less tons of CO2 in the air per year than otherwise. That helps!
Not if that country just offloads industry to another country. This is what the west is doing, offloading dirty industry to China, then pointing fingers at China.
💯
Australia is “reducing” their emissions by having China manufacture everything using the coal that companies dig out of our ground and sell them, then we buy it all back and ship it over here on planes and boats, while claiming we’ve reduced emissions.
It’s all a grift.
"Nobody else is doing anything about it so why should we go slightly without and pay slightly more to do our part?"
I have generally found the lack of urban trees in Europe pretty shocking. Even in wide open squares where there's no reason not to have them it's often just cobblestones. While Europe is certainly cooler than where I live, even so it seems like it would be very hot and unpleasant if the weather gets even a bit warm.
Some countries like France and the Netherlands are doing some good work on this lately but it needs to be more widespread and unfortunately it will take some time to pay dividends.
And yes we need to decarbonize more aggressively. It may be a bit painful but less so than the pain of inaction.
We're past the "prevention" phase and have moved on to the "adaption" phase.
It appears that Europe does many things right for sustainability and climate change - public transit over cars, recycling, reducing carbon footprint better compared to other parts of the world.
No. It wasn't enough by far
There have been many right ideas, but what has actually been done was only a tiny little change, not significant.
Wouldn’t simply addressing climate change generally be the answer? I don’t understand why this might be confusing.
Because billionaires make that impossible.
The CEO of starbucks lives in LA. The HQ of starbucks is in Seattle.
He COULD move the HQ to LA. He COULD buy a 2nd house in Seattle.
Instead he takes his own personal commercial jet DAILY from LA to Seattle, and back again. Every day.
There is a commercial jet that flies the skies, using up fuel, and burning through the atmosphere 365 days a year.
All because this fuckwit doesn't want to have a ZOOM meeting.
That's one billionaire. One. Now think of the fact that 1 billionaire on average creates more environmental damage than 1 million regular people combined.
And that's ONE. Now think of all the billionaires in the world. Combined.
And then there's America. I live in America. If I need something from the store, I'll walk. Yeah, it may be a 15 minute walk. Each way. But, c'mon. It's not that far. By the time you look for your keys, and open the garage, and start the car, and everything, you're looking at 5-10 minutes anyways. May as well just walk. I got a little wagon I use to carry all my groceries. It handles 750lbs.
Now, every car on the road, doing these short little trips. It feels like not much, but it adds up.
On top of all that, I have a theory that paved surfaces retain natural heat, and in the case of black tar surfaces, RAISE the heat.
As opposed to grass, which would lower it.
But billionaire or middle class, nobody wants to give up their ammenities. Even if the planet suffers. Guess we'll all just die in an inferno.
should the EU take action against billionaires or the US to address climate change? I suppose they could impose sanctions, fines, or something to save EU lives?
Or Guillitines. I'm good with that too.
Many people seem comfortable with bringing back guillotines, including me. It would be interesting to see the reaction.
is this serious ?
120yrs ago, yeah CO2 emissions will be a problem in the decades to come
50 years ago, yeah emissions will be a problem in decades to come, including heatwaves that will damage infrastructure and kill poeple
30 years ago, yeah emissions will be a problem in decades to come, including heatwaves that will damage infrastructure and kill poeple
10 years ago, yeah emissions will be a problem in decades to come, including heatwaves that will damage infrastructure and kill poeple
this year, how about that heat, if only we'd been warned /s
it very likey that if we're not near emission system by 2030/2035 (not net zero bullshit) then we'll end civilization in the decades to come as there is no coming black from the increasing tipping points. Strat with bannibg all private jets.
It appears that Europe does many things right for sustainability and climate change
as long as this sort of bullshit is prevalent in the zeitgeist then nothing changes.
As to doing something ? vote green (not to get the Greens into power per se but to move the Overton Windows) , don't fly, don't drive.
What we'll do instead is normalise out stupidity as we go fascist and keep on keeping on, like we do with inequality, hunger, homelessness, war erc
Methinks this needs policy-level changes. There's only so much we can do individually at this point
Immediate terms: There's nothing that can be done to curb the heatwave IMO, but there are ways to prevent danger. Namely, AC, cooling centers, public education on preventing heat-related injuries/deaths... Maybe govts can even temporarily reduce regulations/give subsidies on split-systems to help nudge some folks, but nothing much else can be done. One pet-idea I have is cooling centers, since I know Houston (which has extreme weathers) opens cooling/warming centers when the weather is too extreme; it is a very progressive implementation that benefits those who are underprivileged
Slightly longer term: Trees/green spaces always help. Public transit systems always help. Some fairly sweeping changes in climate-related regulation (ease AC regulations, tighten car regulations, tax on pollution, etc), aimed at both reducing danger and improving the climate... or at least recuperate some "pollution tax" so the govt can use the money to plant more trees and build more trains. Also some European countries can do so much better at discouraging car use (or at least switch to EVs) given how good the train networks are; for countries without good train networks, build some
Even longer term: Massive investments in green energy; if they are investing already, invest more. But be practical... temporary solutions like nuclear are not everyone's cup of tea but they help with the transition. Do better on international collaboration. Find ways to discourage international trading partners from over-polluting (probably a combination of tariffs and negotiations... not my specialty).
Obligatory not an economist/political scientist, there are probably better ways to implement these than what I suggested
Your last point should be first. Europe (and the UK) are reducing their carbon output but our success is dwarfed by the increase in co2 output by China and India. The US has also made no effort to reduce emissions but because industry there is declining it hasn't increased for a few years. We need to apply a carbon tax to imports from those countries.
A time machine
Build infrastructure to make Europe more heat tolerant.
A lot of what Americans do to deal with the heat, like air conditioning and ice water, need to get adopted in Europe. As for the concern of the energy needed to power air conditioners, most demand generally follows peak solar production. Also, if you install heat pumps instead of normal air conditioners, it will help lower carbon requirements for heating.
According to the UN and other organizations: To PREVENT the heatwaves, it is crucial that the amount of CO2 released globally is reduced. All nations need to tighten laws to lower CO2 production. This means you need to VOTE for the right party. To MITIGATE the effects of the heatwaves, countries can do many things: plant trees in towns (as they lower temperatures due to evaporation and shade), improve architecture etc. That may not help too much though, as the intensity and length of the heatwaves will continue to increase over the next decades. So reduction of CO2 released is the best bet.
You can't prevent them you can only prepare for them mainly with AC. Europe must get on AC or at least have more cooling centers for people.
So we will just run for cover from ac spaces to other ac spaces like americans? No thanks.
AC just displace the issue, you will be good in your ACed appartment but the neighbor who face the exhaust will be blasted with hotter air.
At a building scale it creates "hot air islands", at a city/datacenter scale it is +2°C at least in a large radius.
AC should be only a part of the solution, as it adds more issues (electricity needs, pfas emissions, dangerous fluids management).
So we will just run for cover from ac spaces to other ac spaces like americans? No thanks.
Well, your other options are enduring the heat or move to somewhere cooler.
You know those reflector screens they put in cars, yeah picture that but enough to cover a continent.
More green wouldn't hurt. The city I live in invested heavily in removing green space. Shrubs and plants are nearly all removed and the remaining empty grass fields are continuously cut. Having green space cools the city down, gives shade and helps animals, so how about we plant things and stop cutting everything?
In the USA, we cover everything we can with black asphalt, and those expansive parking lots means you can't walk anywhere.
The interesting question for the US is “can we be doing anÿhing to make things worse than we already are?”
The major pollutants are manufacturing, mining, oil and energy production, and animal agriculture. not air conditioners. If we want the rest of the world to stop producing with manufacturing, you're going to need to create agreements to share your wealth in ways that do not require the exchange of goods. That's why people over-produce right now. For money. That's why the world will continue to get hotter for the considerable future. Nobody wants to be the ones to give away our wealth for free. You need to take care of your people and install air conditioners like the rest of the world. Good luck finding somewhere in China without air conditioning.
Build a big ass wall that keeps out the heat, and mexico will pay for it!