Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It will be handwaved away until the people with money and power are affected by it.

The irony being that people with money and power are the least likely to ever be affected by it.




Phase two will be "of course everyone always believed in climate change, we just disagreed on policies for addressing it".

Phase three will be "it was actually the liberals who blocked action on climate change"


This is meant to be a thought provoking question, not an attack:

What if the safety of the planet lay in stopping greenhouse emissions. But certain large blocs of the international community refused to stop pumping it out of the ground.

Now say diplomatic means don't create any real progress, only broken promises. For an example of what that might look like, take the nuclear accord John Kerry just got Iran to sign this year. Already they have tested new long range missiles and their leader, Khamenei, released a statement this week: "Those who say the future is in negotiations, not in missiles, are either ignorant or traitors," [0].

Seriously, what happens when those with fossil fuel reserved chose to use them, even when your country is being responsible? What if it meant another war in Iraq: would the positions on policy for fixing AGW swtich between Democrats and Republicans?

[0]: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-missiles-khamenei-idU...


it is an interesting question - would we go to war to prevent carbon release?

for me to have a position on the question would depend on the particulars.

A related thought - there aren't a ton of countries that have both large fossil fuel reserves and a large enough domestic market to burn them at a high rate. US and China are the only two that come to mind. Maybe Iran? Which implies that sanctions (either on the import of energy or the export of finished goods) might be effective if you can keep the US and China on board.


As long as people are flying private jets to climate conferences I cry foul.

If they want anyone to act they would do as the king of Nineveh:Jona 3:6 "For word came to the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes."

The moment I see climate scientists starts to switch to teleconferences I think I will give it a second thought.

(Yeah. I know many, possibly most of you don't believe a thing of that but it is still a good example.)

(FWIW: I make a living making solar cell technology, I previously programmed recycling machines. I just happen to be tired of hypocrisy.)


A private jet releases something like 20 tons of CO2 per flight (depending on distance / type of jet / etc. etc.). The US Coal industry released 5.4 billion tons of CO2 last year. Each private jet flight then represents about 120 milliseconds of US Coal production. So yeah, Al Gore and Leo could (and should) cut out their private jet habit, but maybe we also should burn less coal?


The power of examples. Or: actions speak louder than words.

The very moment politicians start acting like there is a crisis, people will listen.

For now it all looks like a giant racketeering scheme to deprieve the small man of cheap energy and travel while the rich ones get richer.

Not saying it is like this, but think about it a moment before knee-jerkingly hitting the downvote button.

I'm in no position to judge the science behind this but I have a nose for fish and something stinks so badly I have a hard time crediting it all to right-wing nuts for now at least.


Yes, and this comment is exactly why the ice shelves are going to collapse before people decide it's worth doing something about it.

All in the guise of cheap energy. Hooray. Energy is cheap, until it becomes a lot more expensive.

Thanks for your lack of vision.


> Thanks for your lack of vision.

The commenter you're replying to is just saying what it appears the average person is thinking, not that they subscribe to it at all.


> I'm in no position to judge the science behind this And yet, you do.

Why do you imagine the politicians would be concerned with climate change? It's not like they or the rest of the oligarchy are going to be the ones affected.


I think you could say the same about most issues that politicians (attempt to) address. Were Nixon or Nancy Reagan ever trapped in the inner-cities deciminated by the results of their failed drug policy? Were generations of their families imprisoned as a result? Does George Bush ever have to worry about ISIS causing harm to himself or his family? Or an onslaught of immigrants on his family ranch? Will Diane Fienstein be spending her old age alone, unarmed, 30 miles from her nearest neighbors or other assistance? Unlikely.


Al Gore buys carbon offsets for his jet travel. Letting him do what he wants and still have a net carbon contribution that is 0.

Of course that depends on the people he pays for the carbon offsets actually reducing carbon emissions somewhere else in the world. It is easier to claim that you will than it is to actually do it.

(My bet is that within 10 years there will be a major scandal as someone in that space turns out to be a pure and simple scammer.)


Alas, I'm afraid accusations of hypocrisy don't make good flotation devices.


Nah, but it helps against getting fooled while we wait for them to either stop trying to fool me (not sure about this) or put their money where their mouth is.


Tu quoque. "Yeah, I'm not giving up smoking until my doctor does".


Good one.

Saw it was below 0 and upvoted you even though I guess "your side" is the one who is busy downvoting me.

Downvoters: can you please stop downvoting based on assumed political belief and start judging content based on quality? Please?


Yeah agreed, you are stating a position as it were fact, and using a ton of faulty logic.

So yes, your position is unpopular, and it's wrong.


I believe you're getting downvoted because the inconsistency in your logic has been pointed out, yet you're persisting with the argument.


It was not about me being downvoted, that is more or less a given, it was about the person replying to me getting downvoted although IMO his point was valid.


Ok, that's why I was confused; by the time I got to the thread, that person had been upvoted back in the black (perhaps due to your votes). Anyway, I love some good discourse. Thanks for contributing to the conversation.


What sort of solar cell tech are you working on?


Off grid, single household. Provide power for lamps, fan, radio, tv and best of all: usb socket for charging.

Often a direct replacement for kerosene solutions.


Sounds great. I just got back from Morocco. Amazed that in this land of endless cloudless days, they use kerosene lamps.

I'd like to help your efforts if possible. I write code. Nothing too amazing but have been at it a while. How can we connect over email?


They're the ones with all the beachfront homes, though...


Yes with insurance subsidised by the state.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: