Will it be too late to save everyone on Earth from climate change?

[TheAlchemist]

There exists a very narrow environmental state where humans can survive, and an even narrower state where human civilization in its current form with a global economy and supply chains can exist. We are deeply blind to how utterly reliant we are on nature and the Earths life-supporting systems to supply us with clean air, clean water, minerals, healthy soils, a stable climate and all the ecosystem "services". All these we take for granted.

When the systems that enable us to live as a global species on this planet start shifting even slightly in a short period of time, we have no idea what sorts of feedback loops or unexpected changes we could trigger. We must remember that for billions of years in the Earths history it has been a totally uninhabitable place for a species like Homo Sapiens. Even modern agriculture became possible just about 10 000 - 15 000 years ago, due to suitable climate conditions.  

But any kind of doomerism won't save us from ourselves, we need a hopeful vision and people who can inspire us to move into harmony and into long term, sustainable co-existence with the Earths life-supporting systems.

Edited August 18, 2023 by TheAlchemist

[kylan11]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

This climate stuff is way overblown.

Consider than in the 20th century it was typical for a country to lose 10 million people to a war. And the population was less than half of what it is today. So even losing 10 million to climate change will be negligible to the human race. Russia and China both lost 20+ million in WW2 and various kinds of famines.

For climate change to be significant it would have to kill 500+ million people. A couple million people dead is not a crisis, it is a blip on the radar screen. A million people were killed in Ethiopia in the last 4 years. You didn't even notice.

Progressives have lost all sense of proportion.

Allow me to disagree here, I think you're focusing solely on the number of deaths due to natural disasters. Climate change affects our ecosystems, food sources, water availability, and can create mass migrations. This could lead to political unrest, wars for resources, WW3 (=nuclear) and even societal collapse in the worst case scenario. We've been close to that scenario for far dumber reasons in the last century.

While we might not have 500+ million people dying directly because of a hurricane or drought, the cascading effects could very possibly be the worst thing that ever happened to the human race.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, Hardkill said:

such a historic tragedy that could've been prevented

If it could have it would have.

You cannot stop oil consumption on a global scale.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Cocolove]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Ecological destruction is not so hard to reverse in the future with all the resources mankind will have.

nature regenerates itself very quickly too. But ecologies are very sensitive and it's not so easy to restore native habitat the more it's gone. Eventually we need to do it before it's too late, and I don't think technology is the answer, we have the resources to do it now.

[Hardkill]

22 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

If it could have it would have.

You cannot stop oil consumption on a global scale.

For the time being yes, but the world now has the ability to transition to renewable much faster now than it has been.

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

For the time being yes, but the world now has the ability to transition to renewable much faster now than it has been.

This is not a thing you can force. It will happen at whatever pace it needs to happen at.

[Scholar]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

This is not a thing you can force. It will happen at whatever pace it needs to happen at.

Consciousness expands from the point of individuals, and these conversations are part of that. The motion of history is embodied through the actual progression of individual actors, this is how Divine Will manifests and evolves.

Forcing things is part of the motions of nature, and must be accepted as such.

[Hardkill]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

This is not a thing you can force. It will happen at whatever pace it needs to happen at.

That's not entirely true. 

If we had a some kind of overwhelming movement like what happened with the civil rights movements, women's rights movement, or Gandhi's civil disobedience movement at a global scale then such activism could successfully enough leaders in power to force the world to transition to renewable energy much faster.

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Hardkill said:

That's not entirely true. 

If we had a some kind of overwhelming movement like what happened with the civil rights movements, women's rights movement, or Gandhi's civil disobedience movement at a global scale then such activism could successfully enough leaders in power to force the world to transition to renewable energy much faster.

That's a bad analogy because this issue is linked to technological development rather than social factors. You can't protest your way to green energy.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Scholar]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That's a bad analogy because this issue is linked to technological development rather than social factors. You can't protest your way to green energy.

Technological development is linked to social factors.

[Hardkill]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That's a bad analogy because this issue is linked to technological development rather than social factors. You can't protest your way to green energy.

I thought we already have the blueprint and technology needed for it. We just need a lot more public spending for these projects.

Even China is already moving fast on this issue despite the immense amount of oil the country still consumes. Have you seen their big solar panel projects?

panda-solar-farm.pdf

Edited August 18, 2023 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

@Hardkill Tell me how you're gonna turn a container ship or airplane into a green energy vehicle?

Economics is a force of its own. Money means life and death for many people. So when you ask people to pay more for energy you are in effect killing them.

The only reason green energy isn't used is because it isn't economical yet. Dirty energy produces cheaper products for humans to survive on.

Edited August 18, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Scholar]

5 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

I thought we already have the blueprint and technology needed for it. We just need a lot more public spending for these projects.

Even China is already moving fast on this issue despite the immense amount of oil the country still consumes. Have you seen their big solar panel projects?

panda-solar-farm.pdf

China is not moving fast on this at all, you are being sold propaganda.

 

[Hardkill]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Hardkill Tell me how you're gonna turn a container ship or airplane into a green energy vehicle?

Economics is a force of its own. Money means life and death for many people. So when you ask people to pay more for energy you are in effect killing them.

The only reason green energy isn't used is because it isn't economical yet. Dirty energy produces cheaper products for humans to survive on.

renewable energy has in many ways actually cost less than the use of fossil fuels or coal.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/17/opinion/us-obama-renewable-energy.html

[Leo Gura]

26 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

renewable energy has in many ways actually cost less than the use of fossil fuels or coal.

Not when you take all the details into account.

[Hardkill]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Not when you take all the details into account.

Could you please refer me to a source for me to a source that would help me understand why green energy is still not economical yet?

 

[Adrian colby]

Nothing stays the same. It is ever changing. If humanity has a chance to combat climate change it will only be to slow it down enough to give humanity time to adapt to those changes. Mostly through technology cause I think we’ve plateaued physically unless they can figure out how to implement the new discovery about morphic fields/genetic stimulation. 

[Gidiot]

Not saying I’m perfect, but if you can’t respect your home what good is it to survive? 
 

the only reason to survive is for the love of life imo and how can you love life if it’s mad max and knowing that you are helping cause suffering and destruction in the world by your own ignorance.

no we can’t force anyone to wise up but if we don’t force ourselves the universe will do it for us

[Leo Gura]

4 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Could you please refer me to a source for me to a source that would help me understand why green energy is still not economical yet?

 

I don't have sources, I just use my head.

[Bobby_2021]

We should be doubling down on nuclear energy for 80%. And put the rest of effort into renewables if you are serious. 

I am getting the feeling that people are not serious. They want to feel like they are doing something rather than get tangible results.

Nuclear energy is the only thing that can save us.

Renewable energy is a fad.