
Avoiding Two Degrees of Warming 'Is Now Totally Unrealistic' - dezgeg
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/06/oppenheimer-interview/529083/?single_page=true
======
RIPKingSteelo
It is a sad state of affairs that long term approaches to profit are not more
prized. US industry paired with massive government subsidy/partnership could
work together effectively, as exemplified historically by the creation of the
internet, modern computing and telecommunications infrastructure, and look at
this dire situation we find ourselves in as an opportunity to compete on a
global level to produce renewable and green energy technologies. Seems like a
missed opportunity on a number of fronts.

This article brings to mind an interview I watched earlier today - Chris
Hedges has a show, On Contact, which airs on RT - he recently interviewed
Christian Parenti, author of 'Tropic of Chaos: Climate Change and the New
Geography of Violence' (aired 6.18.2017). They addressed positive feedback
loops, violence that has climate change as the impetus, migration and refugee
status and more.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELqZe6Xqwzc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELqZe6Xqwzc)

------
afinlayson
I wish we had more engineers in politics. The politicians and Trumps of the
world don't understand how to solve problems, just how to convince you that
it's not their fault or worse what's shiny enough to distract. We need
solutions, not a bitch fest.

------
jack9
So it's the US's fault that other countries are acting badly? This blame game
isn't even coherent. China, India, and some of the other disproportionate
polluters are to blame, not some whack job US president who decided not to
subsidize some other participant economies in the short term to get a pinky
promise they would do better, in the interest of the planet.

~~~
fulafel
China and India have much lower per capita CO2 footprints. So they are
disproportionate in a good way. (Though the still need to do better, like
everyone else)

~~~
jack9
Individuals can do better, but nations in aggregate are acting to increase
global warming. The CO2 footprint game is a tool for political spin, not
identifying what bodies are at fault now. Is it the US because the President
broke out of a non-binding treaty? or China as the actual physical top
polluter? or India who is poised to compete for that position despite existing
agreements to reduce emissions already in place?
([http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/india-
opening...](http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/india-opening-coal-
mines-will-surpass-u-s-in-coal-production/))

It's one thing to be positive and denounce symbolic political actions, but
it's another to lose sight of what's going on in the world and weighing the
physical effects.

