
World has 10 years to get climate change under control, U.N. scientists say - harrylove
https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/10/08/world-has-only-years-get-climate-change-under-control-un-scientists-say
======
craftyguy
Yea there's just no way. Any response at a global (and, in the US, national
and state) level will be 100% reactive, and 0% proactive. Since there are
still people arguing over the cause, I'm starting to think it might be more
productive to move the conversation from trying to be proactive (which
requires everyone to agree on the cause) to reactive (which does not).

In other words, start preparing for the outcome of this. We, as a species,
cannot seem to be able to stop what we are doing.

~~~
fulafel
There has already been some response.

~~~
craftyguy
The largest global action has been the Paris thing, which is trying to be
proactive, i.e. "we can still win this, and here's how".

But the largest (or 2nd largest[?], but it doens't matter) offender has
removed themselves from the agreement. I'm only aware of small municipalities
taking action to handle the inevitable (e.g. on the east coast of the US), but
it's not going to help at a national or global level.

~~~
true_religion
You kind of have to force compliance. With proactive action, it always seems
overly aggressive to force compliance. With reactive action, it feels okay as
you can honestly point at things that improved due to your force.

~~~
ehmish
I have a feeling a war would do more damage to the climate than someone
pulling out of the paris agreement would ever do, if that's how you're
suggesting how to enforce compliance

------
mehrdadn
I love this quote [1]:

> To limit global warming to 1.5 degree C is "possible within the laws of
> chemistry and physics," said Jim Skea, co-chair of IPCC Working Group III.

[1] [https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/07/world/climate-change-new-
ipcc...](https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/07/world/climate-change-new-ipcc-report-
wxc/index.html)

------
DiffEq
Wasn't Al Gore saying pretty much the same thing 12 years ago? And here we
are...and his predictions have not come to pass.

~~~
ChrisLomont
I don't think you're recalling what Al Gore said. Care to provide a cited
quote he got wrong regarding this thread?

------
andrenth
“One must free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is
environmental policy. [What we're doing] has almost nothing to do with the
climate. We must state clearly that we use climate policy to redistribute de
facto the world's wealth.”

“ Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with protecting the
environment. The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy
summit during which distribution of the world's resources will be negotiated.”

— Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of the IPCC in 2010

------
collyw
Can someone explain to me why planning a ton of trees to suck up excess C02
won't work? It seems so obvious and simplistic that it must have been thought
of already so I can only assume that there are problems with it.

~~~
cableshaft
It would. It was even mentioned in the article. The problem is we'd have to
convert back the land that's currently used to make food for everyone, which
I'm sure will get tons of pushback. From the article:

"The radical transformation also would mean that, in a world projected to have
more than 2 billion additional people by 2050, large swaths of land currently
used to produce food would instead have to be converted to growing trees that
store carbon and crops designated for energy use. The latter would be used as
part of a currently nonexistent program to get power from trees or plants and
then bury the resulting carbon dioxide emissions in the ground, leading to a
net subtraction of the gas from the air — bioenergy with carbon capture and
storage, or BECCS."

------
sintaxi
Ah yes, the ol' give us money an power or we're all doomed trick.

~~~
Delmania
Yes, I suspected you were a libertarian, and your comments prove that out. One
sign is when you think your (misguided) beliefs trump an expert's knowledge.

~~~
sintaxi
This isn't a scientific report. The IPCC (who wrote the report) is a political
panel, not a scientific one. They make policies. Its the opinion of
politicians that dramatic action must be taken within 10 years, not the
opinion of independent scientists. Do you think Al Gore is a scientist as
well?

------
Crontab
We will fail.

