Hacker News Reader

Comment by LatteLazy | Hacker News Reader

Then I'd have to ask how you measure progress? Are you referring to a moral/social sense of improving?

Right now, We're not just emitting co2, we're emitting more this year than last year.

And the amount more is rising as well.

Any actual measure of co2E emissions shows this problem is bad, its getting worse and its getting worse faster over time.

View on HN

It surely doesn't help that we have leaders that continue to promote fossil fuels or unsustainable exploitation of rainforests, etc. Also unhelpful is rampant capitalism where environmental costs are not part of the equation when making profits.

But in this same system we are nearing a tipping point where renewables are the better choice for the bottom line. And that is progress.

I am quite sympathic to your predictions, I both hope and semi expect some big changes in the next decade. But I have to be strict: this is the potential for progress, not actual progress. And I think it's probably already too late, it might be too late now even to avert the worst of climate change. Adding another decade to restructure socially and get non-western non-democratic countries into the same mold is a huge delay at a very late stage.

We will see.

Also, according to a BBC article, Western countries' population is going to drop when we hit 2100. It'll be interesting to see if that turns out to be true, I mean, it is a 80yr into the future prediction.

Japan's population is expected to be half. Spain and others are going in the same way, China and India are expected to reduce but not by half.

Let's hope that we keep working on this problem.

As EVs rise, I expect this to be a positive turnout. it doesn't matter that 1 EV save a lot of CO2, buses and planes are becoming electric. The more electrification we do, the more solar and wind we use, the better.

India has few hundred MW solar panel project. Other countries are also planning them, right? So let's hope that they do work in the intended way..

This is incorrect if the output measures lag the input.

You would need a very long lag, around 40 years.

And a secret lag, one that no scientist, economist, politician or other expert has predicted or discovered. One effecting the whole globe.

And that huge lag cause would now need to suddenly stop causing lag (otherwise we're fucked).

And if you have all these factors, what would that mean? It would mean I was right, no point in further action, global warming was fixed around 1990 and no one noticed because of the lag!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com